Almost seven years have passed since the initial publication reporting that bone marrow cells regenerate infarcted myocardium. The subsequent years produced hundreds of investigations that ran the gamut of findings from validation to disproof. Undeterred by the concurrent debate, clinical trials ensued to test the efficacy and safety of bone marrow derived cell population for autologous therapy in clinical treatment of myocardial disease. In the following conversational exchange, two scientists with distinct perspectives weigh the pros and cons of pursuing bone marrow stem cell therapy and look toward finding a consensus of where the future lies for regenerative medicine and the heart. The conclusion is that the two camps may not be as far apart as it may seem from the rancor in literature and at meetings, and the potential of one day achieving regenerative therapy is indeed a vision that both parties enthusiastically share.Sussman: I think we can agree that therapeutic implementation of regenerative approaches for the myocardium will depend upon finding a cell population that can do the job. Bone marrow stem cells are attractive primarily from an availability standpoint as well as autologous therapy, but the literature on their efficacy as a population for mediating cardiac regeneration is mixed. This includes your Nature paper from a couple of years back (1) as well as others from various labs indicating that potential for transdifferentiation is miserably low (or non-existent altogether). Contrast those findings with observations primarily driven by the Anversa group (as well as many others) documenting the capacity of bone marrow derived stem cells to transdifferentiate into cardiogenic lineages that mediate significant reparative processes and we have a dilemma. Do we pursue the use of bone marrow-derived stem cell populations as a viable approach for mediating cardiac regeneration or look for a different cell type with allegedly more robust regenerative capacity? If we are going to move things in a therapeutically relevant direction, then the use of bone marrow derived cells has already begun in clinical trials and the stands the greatest chance of paying off in the short run. Do you think that planning such trials is a waste of time and energy with this cell population? I submit that your Nature