Stem cells and when the biggest battles are not those in the fight for health, but those we fight within ourselves

In the world of parents raising children with disabilities, miracles often come packaged in tiny glass bottles. Magical therapies, instant improvements, revolutionary approaches — everything promises “a brand-new life,” as long as you pay enough. And preferably add some water from Tibet. Today we’re talking about stem cells and cerebral palsy. And, most important — what science actually knows, not what the ads want us to believe.

Let’s remember what cerebral palsy really is. It’s like trying to drive a car with both the gas and the brake glued down — muscles either refuse to move or stay permanently tense, because the motor cortex says one thing while the pyramidal tracts are still arguing about the traffic light.

In spastic forms, what we politely call “increased tone” (and what in real life looks like a muscle that never takes a day off) comes from a damaged motor cortex, lost neurons, and one particularly annoying barrier called the glial scar. Think of it as a biological wall the brain builds to protect itself — only this wall is as stubborn as a relative waiting in line at the post office. And it lets no one through .Not a new neuron. Not a new axon. Nothing at all.

Biology may be boring for marketing brochures, but for parents it’s survival-level knowledge.

So why can’t the brain just “fix” itself?

If you’ve ever wondered why new neurons don’t magically grow after injury, the answer is both depressing and brilliant: neurons are post-mitotic. Translation — they stopped dividing back in embryonic development. Why? To avoid complete chaos: if neurons kept dividing, we’d lose memories, identity, and personality with every cell cycle. So evolution locked them into G0 phase like a hotel with no check-out option.

This lock is guarded by two molecular bouncers:

p27^Kip1 — the doorman who won’t let CDKs start division Rb — the bodyguard keeping E2F tied up so it can’t flip on the “replicate DNA” switch

If anything forces a neuron to divide, it usually dies of apoptosis. Trying to regenerate the brain this way is like trying to run Windows 95 on a brand-new Mac — it won’t work, and the crash will be spectacular.

And now: the glial scar — the politest and most infuriating gatekeeper. After an injury, the brain doesn’t say, “Let’s regrow, comrade neuron!” It says, “Lock down the area, build barricades, and no more damage! ”The result: a scar made of astrocytes, microglia, and extracellular matrix — a chemical, mechanical, and molecular barrier to recovery.

The main culprits:

• CSPGs — block axon growth

• Myelin proteins (Nogo-A, MAG, OMgp) — activate RhoA/ROCK and freeze growth cones

• Cytokines (IL-1β, TNF-α) — keep inflammation burning

• Oxidative stress — kills off cells trying to survive

The brain has one main goal: stability, not regeneration. For a parent, this sounds like “there will be no miracle,” but reality is more nuanced — and yes, there is a bit of future in it.

Stem cells — a beautiful idea, a stubborn reality

“Let’s put something in there that can divide and rebuild the brain. ”Well… not exactly.

In CP, medicine uses several types:

1) Mesenchymal stem cells (MSC)

The easiest to obtain. They do not turn into neurons, but they have superhero powers — paracrine effects. They release BDNF, VEGF, IGF-1, GDNF, which:

• reduce inflammation

• help neurons survive

• boost blood vessel growth

• activate PI3K–AKT and MAPK/ERK

• improve plasticity

In short: they don’t build new neurons — they make the neighborhood nicer for the ones still alive.

2) Neural precursor cells (NPC)

In theory, they can become neurons. In practice — yeah, good luck. To help, they must:

• migrate

• survive

• form synapses

• integrate into the correct circuits

And the brain answers: “No, thank you. ”Because of the scar, inflammation, toxic environment, and lack of structural cues.

3) Hematopoietic stem cells (HSC)

Effect: mostly immune modulation. And now the sad-but-sober part: clinical evidence.

Dozens of studies clearly show:

• the therapy is safe

• improvements in GMFM are mild and last 3–6 months

• stem cells do NOT integrate into brain tissue

• MSCs disappear within weeks

• effects are biochemical, not structural

And then comes the twist.

Exosomes — the quiet future that overtook stem cells

When researchers checked what happens to injected cells, they discovered something wild: the cells vanish, but the effect remains.

So what’s doing the work? Their exosomes.

Exosomes are tiny lipid bubbles (30–150 nm) packed with:

• microRNAs (miR-21, miR-146a, miR-124, miR-133b)

• proteins

• lipids

• metabolites

And they can:

• cross the blood–brain barrier

• suppress inflammation

• activate BDNF and CREB

• boost angiogenesis

• help neurons survive

• promote remyelination

Best part? No tumor risk. No immune drama. No uncertainty.

Exosomes are the best parts of MSCs — without the baggage.

The real science: the future is signal, not cell

Medicine is shifting to a new paradigm:

It’s not the cells that heal — it’s the information they carry.

In the coming years we’ll see:

• designer exosomes loaded with only the needed microRNAs

• nanocapsules delivering CREB–BDNF signals

• combinations with neuromodulation and physio

• personalized molecular therapies

In short?

The brain isn’t a neighborhood car wash where you drop in, spray in new neurons, and leave shiny and new. What’s lost is often lost — and the hope lies not in magical cellular rebirth, but in that wonderful, stubborn thing called plasticity, plus care.

Stem cells are a fantastic promise, but often resemble that classic brown school backpack — lots of enthusiasm inside, never enough supplies for all the assignments.

Real regeneration still plays hard to get. Neuroengineers tear their hair out, moms read scientific papers with heroic determination, and children fight their daily battles with quiet bravery.

Whatever the therapy, the most important thing is this: never underestimate the miracle of tiny steps, loud laughter, and everyday resilience.

And if someone promises you a miracle? Always answer: “Show me the peer-reviewed study.”

And if they say medicine is boring — hand them this story. It has everything: science, hope, and just a sprinkle of motherly tears for flavor.

Sources:

Allan, S. M., & Rothwell, N. J. (2001). Inflammation in central nervous system injury. British Journal of Pharmacology, 130(5), 1023–1034. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bjp.0703406

Caplan, A. I. (2017). Mesenchymal stem cells: Time to change the name! Cell Stem Cell, 26(5), 613–615. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stem.2017.04.008

Chen, K. H., Chen, C. H., Wallace, C. G., Yip, H. K., et al. (2020). Mesenchymal stem cell–derived exosomes attenuate ischemic brain injury by activating PI3K/AKT pathways. Journal of Translational Medicine, 18(1), 32. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12967-020-02215-y

Feng, M., Tian, L., Li, Y., Zhang, Y., & Jiang, R. (2021). Safety and efficacy of stem cell therapy for cerebral palsy: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Frontiers in Neurology, 12, 681041. https://doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2021.681041

Jiang, W., Wang, B., & Li, Y. (2024). Exosomes in neural repair: Progress, challenges, and clinical potential. Frontiers in Neuroscience, 18, 1359021. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2024.1359021

Kandel, E. R., Schwartz, J. H., Jessell, T. M., Siegelbaum, S. A., & Hudspeth, A. J. (2013). Principles of Neural Science (5th ed.). McGraw-Hill.

Lau, A., & Tymianski, M. (2010). Glutamate excitotoxicity and neurodegeneration—Mechanisms and strategies for therapeutic intervention. Nature Medicine, 16(11), 1383–1390. https://doi.org/10.1038/nm.2246

Li, Q., et al. (2023). Mesenchymal stem cell–derived exosomes promote neuroregeneration after hypoxic injury via CREB/BDNF signaling. Cell Stem Cell, 30(4), 601–617.e8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stem.2023.01.008

Lonze, B. E., & Ginty, D. D. (2002). Function and regulation of CREB family transcription factors in the nervous system. Neuron, 35(4), 605–623. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0896-6273(02)00828-0

Lu, B., Nagappan, G., & Lu, Y. (2014). BDNF and synaptic plasticity, cognitive function, and dysfunction. Handbook of Experimental Pharmacology, 220, 223–250. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-45106-5_9

Otero-Ortega, L., et al. (2017). Exosomes promote long-term recovery after stroke by increasing neurogenesis, angiogenesis and synaptogenesis. Stroke, 48(10), 2844–2852. https://doi.org/10.1161/STROKEAHA.117.017511

Raposo, G., & Stoorvogel, W. (2013). Extracellular vesicles: Exosomes, microvesicles, and friends. Journal of Cell Biology, 200(4), 373–383. https://doi.org/10.1083/jcb.201211138

Schwab, M. E. (2010). Functions of Nogo proteins and their receptors in the nervous system. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 11(12), 799–811. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn2936

Silver, J., & Miller, J. H. (2004). Regeneration beyond the glial scar. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 5(2), 146–156. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn1326

Walter, J., Honsek, S. D., Illes, S., Wellen, J. M., & Hartung, H. P. (2015). Neuroprotective functions of MSC-derived trophic factors and extracellular vesicles. Stem Cell Research & Therapy, 6(1), 137. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13287-015-0127-5

Wang, X., Cheng, H., Hua, R., Yang, J., & Li, T. (2020). Mesenchymal stem cell therapy improves motor function in children with cerebral palsy: A meta-analysis. Stem Cell Research & Therapy, 11, 63. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13287-020-1587-8

Yiu, G., & He, Z. (2006). Glial inhibition of CNS axon regeneration. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 7(8), 617–627. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn1956