Slashdot Mirror


Stem Cell Firm May Have Administered Unproven Treatments

ananyo writes "With Texas pouring millions of dollars into developing adult stem-cell treatments, doctors there are already injecting paying customers with unproven preparations, supplied by an ambitious new company. Celltex Therapeutics 'multiplies and banks' stem cells derived from people's abdominal fat and its facility in Sugar Land opened in December 2011 and houses the largest stem-cell bank in the United States. But Nature has uncovered evidence that the company is involved in the clinical use of the cells on US soil, which the FDA has viewed as illegal in other cases."

9 of 221 comments (clear)

  1. Consent by Jazari · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The only question should be: "Were the patients fully informed?" If I have a terminal or otherwise untreatable condition, I want to be able to decide for myself whether or not an unproven treatment is worth the risk.

    Some people need "protection" or "hand-holding"? No problem. Protect them. But I also want the right to opt out of the government's protection.

    1. Re:Consent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I worked with a non-practicing MD. He loved to tell stories about his days working with patients, and one of the things that stands out in my mind is when he told us "Informed consent is a joke. I know what's best for my patient, and that's what they're going to choose. It's impossible for me to actually make them understand the pros and cons, so it's all in how I explain the options."

      It's true enough. People tend to trust their doctor, and in general don't have the necessary knowledge to make informed decisions.

  2. Re:What's the point? by Misanthrope · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Because the average patient doesn't have the background to understand what they're getting themselves into. Without laws to the contrary snake oil salesman can claim whatever they want about a treatment or medication. Do you really want to live in the 19th century?

  3. Re:What's the point? by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    People who say things like that generally seem to assume two things: first, that full and accurate information will be available; and second, that they'll be able to interpret the information and make an informed decision -- after all, they're smart and knowledgeable and can think for themselves, not like all those other sheeple! They could, of course, educate themselves about the history of patent medicine (and food production) and why the FDA and similar organizations in other countries were created in the first place, but it's easier to grumble about "government gatekeepers" and decry regulation as a matter of principle.

    --
    The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
  4. Re:What's the point? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    But do they have the education to understand what they are reading?

  5. Re:What's the point? by darronb · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Uh, dude... I have family members that buy bottles of new age memory water that have been impressed with good memories and are supposed to help you along on your path to enlightenment. They've also bought polished black rocks that "retune the negative energy of cellphones into good energy that can heal any illness" which if cellphones aren't around they'll fall back on the energy of underground streams.

    Actual snake oil was so much more straightforward.

    People form groups. Bullshit is spread around. When someone hears the same bullshit from two places, they tend to go "oh my god, that must be true!".

    Never underestimate the power of stupidity and ignorance. The general population of the world is nowhere near rational.

  6. Re:What's the point? by darronb · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ... because desperate people will do desperate things.

    Sure, things could be a lot better... but it's a big assumption that people will (a) make informed decisions and (b) not get totally taken advantage of.

    The second one person out of a hundred has a positive outcome on some test drug, all known dangers are totally ignored and everyone wants it. The corp selling the drug starts to suspect there's a problem, but they are making a lot of money so they wait for more conclusive proof. Two years later, everyone's dead of kidney failure.

    People are not rational. Even otherwise quite rational people given desperate choices will take wild gambles and will blindly trust anyone saying they can help.

  7. Re:What's the point? by artor3 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Nope I dont, but I have sure been in enough research labs. But if you have colon cancer how long are you going to wait to 'educate' yourself? How long do your doctors want you too? What type and how aggressive. Care to be Steve jobs?

    And no they don't. They fall for snake oil all the time. ALL THE TIME.

    If you have some terminal illness that is killing you so fast that you can't even take two weeks to do your homework and think on it, it seems like the risk:reward for potential snake oil might be quite attractive even thinking rationally. If you're already going to die soon otherwise then what's the worst that can happen?

    The worst that can happen is you spend $50k on a treatment that doesn't buy you a single god-damned day of further life. Now, not only are you dead, but you get to go to your grave knowing that you've heaped an extra burden on your loved ones for nothing. But since at the time of making the decision you're still in the bargaining stage of grief, you don't think about that. The heartless scammers running these cons count on that.

  8. Re:What's the point? by Belial6 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It probably will take decades. Mostly because people are being given wrong information. For example, your McDonalds comment. A McDonalds Quarter Pounder is not bad for you. The Pasta you made at home is. People are buying candy as health food because it is "Fat Free". Then you have the problem that "obesity" is so incorrectly defined that every Mr Universe for decades has been defined as "obese" while people who reduce their BMI by replacing muscle with fat are being patted on the back for "getting in shape".