> That's why that pig islet transplant trial in Russia is so important: it doesn't need immunosuppression.

I agree. I can see why doctors are concerned that the immune system could continue to harm transplanted Islet Cells; this makes sense if the Islet Cells were first damaged the immune system in the first place. In my case I don't believe this is an ongoing process; my islet cells were damaged when my immune system rose to combat a viral infection (or so my specialist has theorised); they now continue to be damaged by increasingly high blood glucose levels - but not by my immune system.

For three years I have survived in incredibly low doses of insulin due to the existence of some Islet Cells in my pancreas. Throughout what my specialist calls a "honeymoon period" these surviving cells have been slowly destroyed by the high glucose levels (they burn out trying to make up for the missing cells) and not by my immune system.

If this is the case then in my particular case (which I do not for one minute think is rare amongst the diabetic community) an Islet Cell transplant is likely to be more effective than rebooting my immune system.

What is even better, the same pioneers that are working on these cures for diabetics are also discovering that the techniques may well apply to other ailments. Imagine the breakthrough if immunosuppresants could be avoided altogether in any transplant!