header logo image


Page 7«..6789..»

Archive for the ‘Stem Cell Tourism’ Category

Stem cell tourism takes advantage of patients, says law …

Thursday, August 4th, 2016

Patients falling prey to stem cell tourism may pay tens of thousands of dollars for procedures that carry no promise of success or carry grievous risks of failure, says law and bioethics Professor Alta Charo.

Photo illustration: iStock

Desperate patients are easy prey for unscrupulous clinics offering untested and risky stem cell treatments, says UWMadison law and bioethics Professor Alta Charo, who is studying stem cell tourism.

Stem cells are cells that can form many types of cells in the body, and that makes them inherently promising and dangerous. Stem cell tourism refers to people traveling, both within the U.S. and abroad, in pursuit of advertised stem cell therapies to purportedly treat a variety of medical conditions.

Alta Charo

The evidence for therapeutic use of stem cells is very limited, except for bone marrow stem cells, but patients all over the world are convinced stem cells will cure their disease, says Charo. While there are some very promising results in the early clinical trials for stem cell therapies using embryonic and other kinds of stem cells, the treatments being advertised by these clinics are dubious, mostly ineffective, and sometimes positively harmful.

Patients are being hoodwinked, but there are dilemmas about tackling (the treatments) at regulatory or political levels.

The outrage over failures in stem cell tourism is limited, Charo says. Patients may pay tens of thousands of dollars for procedures that may carry no promise of success or carry grievous risks of failure. Most people have no reason to pay attention, and those who are paying attention are sick, so they are focused on trying anything, Charo says. If it does not work, they are already in a bad position with plenty to think about.

During a search for stem cell therapies on the web, Charo found products that supposedly enhance the natural formation of stem cells in the skin alongside approved and unapproved treatments in the United States, and stem cell clinics outside the United States, like a stem cell treatment for spinal conditions that might be innocuous, but is probably useless.

While there are some very promising results the treatments being advertised by these clinics are dubious, mostly ineffective, and sometimes positively harmful.

Alta Charo

Some American operators are trying to slip through Food and Drug Administration regulation, says Charo, who served as senior policy advisor in the Office of the Commissioner of the FDA between 2009 and 2011. The FDA regulates medical devices, tissue transplants and drugs, but not organ transplants or the way medicine is practiced.

To sell a product that can heal without claiming it is a drug, some clinics remove stem cells from a patient, grow them with minimal manipulation, and then reinsert the resulting cells back to the same patient. There has been a long-running battle over whether that is a tissue transplant akin to organ transplantation and thus the practice of medicine, or a tissue transplant that is acting like drug, Charo says. If the latter, then what you do is subject to FDA (regulation), so you have to prove that your product is safe and effective, which almost always requires expensive clinical trials.

In early February, an appeals court upheld the FDAs ability to regulate manipulated stem cells as drugs, Charo notes. But the victory may be hollow: Each case takes a tremendous amount of effort to bring suit, prove the facts and win the appeal, and many other clinics may open up in the meantime.

In some countries, pretty much anything goes, Charo says. Almost half of stem cell treatments occur in China, but Mexico and Russia also have growing sectors. Some clinics advertise brain injury treatment for patients who are in no condition to travel, she says. Patients, and especially parents of children with injury or disease, are often desperate. One child went to Russia and raw bone marrow was injected into the brain. Its horrifying.

One child went to Russia and raw bone marrow was injected into the brain. Its horrifying.

Alta Charo

One view of stem cell tourism comes from studies by Paul Knoepfler of the University of California, who found that most clinical trials occur in Europe and especially the United States, where regulation is strictest, but the so-called therapeutic clinic locations are mostly in China, Mexico and Costa Rica, Charo says. She also cites research by Timothy Caulfield of the University of Alberta and Allen Petersen at Monash University in Australia, who are studying the motivations and effect of stem cell tourism.

Its unclear how much harm these unregulated treatments are causing to medical tourists because in the absence of comprehensive regulation, there is no comprehensive follow-up data. We already have had two reported deaths of children, and there are probably more people injured than anybody would imagine. Its time we started complaining a little more loudly, Charo says.

Limits on advertising could slow medical tourism to unscrupulous clinics, but that tactic is legally troublesome, Charo says. The International Society for Stem Cell Research tried to list effective and ineffective clinics, but it got letters charging it with business defamation. Even if they could have won they did not have money for the litigation, so they took down the posting. It was tremendously frustrating.

It is time to lose the hype without losing the hope.

Alta Charo

Consumers, she says, could raise these issues with the Federal Trade Commission, which is charged with regulating false or misleading advertising, but gets few complaints on the issue. Scientists can work with fellow scientists, with patient-advocacy organizations and regulatory authorities such as the FDA.

At this point, Charo notes, stem cells have become a magic word. Often new areas of science get that reputation; in 19th century medical devices, everything with electricity or magnetism was magic. Today its stem cells and nanotechnology. It is time to lose the hype without losing the hope.

Go here to read the rest:
Stem cell tourism takes advantage of patients, says law ...

Read More...

Stem Cell Therapy in Mexico for Chronic Heart Failure …

Thursday, August 4th, 2016

Home Blogs Stem Cell Treatment Mexico Stem Cell Therapy in Mexico for Chronic Heart Failure

Stem cell therapy in Mexico for chronic heart failure can help reduce the risk of heart attack at an affordable price. Though heart stem cell treatment in Mexico is yet to find many takers, patients will be glad to know that the Latin American country is home to numerous state-of-the art hospitals offering stem cell therapy.

Medical tourism in Mexicois a growing industry and one can undergo quality, yet affordable treatments in the country.

The study showed that patients with low-functioning hearts could improve their condition with the help of ACP stem cell therapy, which is also available in Mexico.

Management of congestive heart failure in Mexico is a good alternative to undergoing treatment in the developed countries of the world. Some of the reasons why patients choose stem cell therapy for chronic heart failure in Mexico are as follows:

Stem cell therapy in Mexico for chronic heart failure can be a low cost solution to leading a healthier life. And if you are an American or a Canadian, all you need to do is a bit of traveling for getting treated at a state-of-the-art facility.

Submit the free quote request form on the right for more information.

Continue reading here:
Stem Cell Therapy in Mexico for Chronic Heart Failure ...

Read More...

Stem cell tourism: A problem right here in the good ol …

Thursday, August 4th, 2016

Last week, I wrote about a man named Jim Gass, a former chief legal counsel for Sylvania, who had suffered a debilitating stroke in 2009 that left him without the use of his left arm, and weak left leg. He could still walk with a cane, but was understandably desperate to try anything to be able to walk unaided and function more normally in life. Unfortunately (at least given what ultimately happened), Mr. Gass was both driven enough, credulous enough, and wealthy enough to spend $300,000 pursuing stem cell tourism in China, Mexico, and Argentina over the course of four years. The result is that he now has a tumor growing in his spinal column, as reported in The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) and The New York Times (NYT). Genetic analysis has demonstrated that the cells in this tumor mass did not come from Jim Gass, and the mass has left him paralyzed from the neck down, except for his right arm, incontinent, and with severe chronic back pain. Worse, although radiation temporarily stopped the tumor from growing, apparently its growing again, and no one seems to know how to stop it. Given that the traits that make stem cells so desirable as a regenerative treatment, their plasticity and immortality (ability to divide indefinitely), are shared with cancer, scientists doing legitimate stem cell research have always feared such a complication and have therefore tried to take precautions to stop just this sort of thing from happening in clinical trials. Clearly, stem cell tourist clinics, which intentionally operate in countries where the regulatory environment isshall we say?less than rigorous are nowhere near as cautious.

At the time I wrote that article, I emphasized primarily clinics outside of the US, where shady operators locate in order to be able to operate largely unhindered by local governments. Youd think that such a thing couldnt possibly be going on in the US. Youd be wrong. About a week and a half ago, Paul Knoepfler, a stem cell scientist who maintains a blog about stem cells, teamed up with Leigh Turner to publish a paper in Cell Stem Cell estimating the number of stem cell clinics in the US. The number they came up with astonished me.

In their article, Selling Stem Cells in the USA: Assessing the Direct-to-Consumer Industry, Turner and Knoepfler explain:

Businesses marketing putative stem cell interventions have proliferated across the U.S. This commercial activity generates a host of serious ethical, scientific, legal, regulatory, and policy concerns. Perhaps the most obvious regulatory question is whether businesses advertising nonhomologous autologous, allogeneic, induced pluripotent, or xenogeneic stem cell therapies are exposing their clients to noncompliant cell-based interventions. Such practices also prompt ethical concerns about the safety and efficacy of marketed interventions, accuracy in advertising, the quality of informed consent, and the exposure of vulnerable individuals to unjustifiable risks.

Prior analyses of companies engaged in direct-to-consumer marketing of stem cell interventions have not explicitly focused on attempting to comprehensively locate and examine U.S. businesses (Lau et al., 2008, Ogbogu et al., 2013, Regenberg et al., 2009), although recent scholarship has identified some U.S. businesses engaged in such activity (Connolly et al., 2014). While such companies have attracted some scrutiny from researchers and journalists, these businesses have not yet been examined in a comprehensive manner (Perrone, 2015, Turner, 2015a). This gap in scholarship has contributed to misunderstandings that need to be corrected.

For example, health researchers, policy-makers, patient advocacy groups, and reporters often use the phrase stem cell tourism when addressing the subject of unapproved cell-based interventions and even in 2016 assume that U.S. citizens must travel to such destinations as China, India, Mexico, and the Caribbean if they wish to access businesses promoting stem cell procedures for a wide range of clinical indications. While travel from the U.S. to international stem cell clinics continues, the rhetoric of stem cell tourism often fails to acknowledge the hundreds of U.S. businesses engaged in direct-to-consumer advertising of stem cell interventions.

Of course, I did exactly this in my previous post, not really acknowledging this industry in the US. True, I did mention the San Diego-based company Stemedica, but I mentioned that company mainly because its business model appears to involve doing actual FDA-monitored clinical trials of its stem cell products in the US but referring any patients contacting the company who are ineligible for its US clinical trials to one of its foreign partners, particularly its affiliate right across border in Tijuana, Novastem. It was, for example, Novastem through which Gordie Howe was treated for his stroke a year and a half ago. Patients referred to Stemedicas partners, of course, pay full price for the stem cell injections, usually around $30,000 a pop.

But what about US-based businesses? Turner and Knoepfler used key words and phrases such as stem cell treatment and stem cell therapy to preliminarily identify putative stem cell businesses and then evaluated the text on the websites of these businesses to refine their analysis. As a result, they identified 351 businesses offering stem cell therapies at 570 clinics, which they listed on this map:

Stem cell clinics in the US.

They also helpfully include a link to an Excel spreadsheet listing all 570 sites, noting:

Many stem cell companies employ multiple physicians and advertise interventions available at numerous clinics. Although such businesses are widely distributed all over the county, we found that clinics tend to cluster in particular states. For example, we found 113 clinics in California, 104 in Florida, 71 in Texas, 37 in Colorado, 36 in Arizona, and 21 in New York. Hotspot cities including Beverly Hills (18), New York (14), San Antonio (13), Los Angeles (12), Austin (11), Scottsdale (11), and Phoenix (10) are designated with stars on the map. Some metropolitan areas, including Southern California around Los Angeles and San Diego, the South Florida region surrounding Miami, the greater Denver area, and the Dallas-Fort Worth metro region, have a relatively high number of clinics even if not all such facilities are technically in one city (Figure S1). While our analyses here do not explain why these businesses cluster in particular areas, we plan to investigate this question further. Possible factors include a relationship between number of clinics and population density, regional variations in use of alternative medical interventions, aging population demographics, and regulatory orientation of state medical boards and consumer protection agencies.

Im sure population density has something to do with so many clinics in California, although one would expect more in New York and Texas if it were just population density. I also suspect that the prevalence and popularity of alternative medicine practitioners has something to do with it, since, oddly enough, I frequently see ads for stem cell clinics and articles praising stem cell therapies on websites oriented towards alternative medicine. Given how often stem cells are advertised as anti-aging treatments (something mentioned by Turner and Knoepfler) and the popularity of plastic surgery in California, it wouldnt surprise me if there is a correlation there as well. These are definitely things that I hope Turner and Knoepfler will look at in future investigations.

So what are these clinics selling stem cells to treat? What are the claims they make? Unfortunately, the claims of US clinics are not much, if at all, different from the claims made by many stem cell tourist clinics in other countries. Claims are made that specific diseases can be treated that are just specific enough to attract customers but vague enough not to promise too much.

It has to be noted that there is not just one kind of stem cell. As I described last time, they range from embryonic stem cells that require human embryos to isolate, to adult stem cells, to cells induced to be stem cells by the introduction of genes responsible for maintaining the stem cell state. As Ill discuss later, this matters when it comes to asking just what the heck the FDA is or isnt doing about this proliferation of stem cell businesses.

Turner and Knoepfler note that most of the businesses that they identified market autologous stem cell-based interventions; i.e., stem cells isolated from the patient and then reinfused. Most isolated these stem cells (or claimed to isolate them, given that its not always clear how such clinics verify that what they have isolated are indeed autologous stem cells) from adipose tissue (fat) or from the bone marrow. Be that as it may, 61% of the clinics examined market autologous adipose-derived stem cell-based interventions; 48% what they describe as autologous stem cells obtained from bone marrow; and 4% stem cells reportedly isolated from peripheral blood. Not surprisingly, lots of clinics offer stem cells isolated from more than one source. Some offer mixed stem cells from both bone marrow and adipose tissue as combination stem cell therapy.

About one in five clinics advertised allogeneic stem cell treatments; i.e., stem cells from another person or source. The usual sources of these stem cells are advertised as amniotic material/fluid (17%), placenta (3.4%), and umbilical cords (0.6%). Its noted in the report the precise source for these products was not clear in all cases, in particular for amniotic stem cells. Indeed, one wonders (at least I do) what the source of amniotic fluid is from which these clinics claim to isolate stem cells. Do they have a deal with a local obstetrical clinic or hospital to provide amniotic fluid or membranes? Do they buy placentas and amniotic membranes from a hospital? Where do these clinics get the raw material (i.e., the human tissue and fluids) to generate these stem cells from? Inquiring minds want to know!

Turner and Knoepfler also noted one business that offers what it claims to be induced pluripotent stem cells. (Remember, these are cells genetically manipulated to revert to being stem cells.) I went back to the spreadsheet and found which company offered this, Regenerative Medical Group. RMG claims to provide induced pluri-potent stem cells from your own cells via an affiliated laboratory, but what I found more interesting were the diseases and conditions it claims to treat with stem cells. Not surprisingly, as was the case for most of the clinics listed, many of the indications were orthopedic, to regenerate cartilage and repair injury. However, RMG also claims to be able to treat kidney diseases, macular degeneration, Parkinsons disease, and, yes, autism. Under a tagline of An autism therapy that WORKS, theres even a video on the website that makes claims that can only be described as grandiose and not supported by science featuring Bryn J. Henderson, DO, JD, FACPE, CIME, the executive director of RMG:

In the video, Dr. Henderson claims that RMG has helped dozens of children with autism using stem cells. He claims that the stem cells circulate through the body, cross the blood-brain barrier and make new cells that change the course and prognosis of the patient with autism. He even claims that most of the time, the change is major. How does he know? He brags about the thank you cards hes gotten from parents. I mean, seriously. This is utterly pathetic. Even antivaccine quacks like Mark and David Geier or Andrew Wakefield can do better at providing evidence. Note that that is not a compliment, given how poor their attempts at studies invariably are. Dr. Henderson, however, presents no science, no clinical trials, no preclinical trials, no nothing other than testimonials, although he does use a lot of science-y-sounding terms. Hell, Ive seen homeopaths who provide more evidence and a more convincing presentation. At least they will cite actual patients rather than thank you notes from patients families. (Oh, and Dr. Henderson, dont bother taking your video down; Ive downloaded it.)

RMGs fact sheet on autism is no better. Citing no evidence, not even case reports, the sheet claims that stem cell infusions for autism can improve:

What evidence is presented? Again, none. This might as well be a chelation therapy clinic. The treatment, however, takes three days, and the patient doesnt have to come back to an RMG clinic at all, although, the fact sheet hastens to add, they can undergo repeat treatments if necessary. In other words, stem cells appear to have been added to the armamentarium of autism biomed quackery.

I could go on, but to me stem cells for autism is so obviously dubious at best and bogus at worst that, given my interest in vaccines and the antivaccine movements mistaken belief that vaccines cause autism, I hope youll forgive me if I zeroed right in on autism. Indeed, nine of the clinics listed in the spreadsheet claim to be able to use stem cells of one kind or another to treat autism.

But, wait, theres more. In addition to RMG:

Another business markets access to what it describes as embryonic stem cell interventions. In addition, we identified two clinics that marketed bovine amniotic cells, a xenogeneic product, for use in humans. Approximately 3% of businesses marketed stem cell interventions without mentioning a particular type of stem cells.

Perusing the list of clinics, I found it hard not to come to the conclusion that there isnt a single disease or condition that someone, somewhere, isnt claiming can be helped with stem cells of one kind or another. Diabetes, heart disease, degenerative diseases, Parkinsons disease, Alzheimers disease, spinal cord injuries, stroke, aging, and even cancer show up on the list of conditions that these 570 clinics claim to be able to treat with stem cells, as Turner and Knoepfler note:

U.S. businesses promoting stem cell interventions claim to treat a wide range of diseases and injuries, as well as advertising stem cells for cosmetic applications, anti-aging, and other purposes (Figure 2B). Some clinics occupy relatively specialized marketplace niches. For example, many cosmetic surgery clinics advertise such procedures as stem cell facelifts and stem cell breast augmentation as well as sexual enhancement procedures. Orthopedic and sports medicine clinics often promote stem cell interventions for joints and soft tissue injuries. Other clinics take a much broader approach and list stem cell interventions for 30 or more diseases and injuries. Such businesses commonly market treatments for neurological disorders and other degenerative conditions, spinal cord injuries, immunological conditions, cardiac diseases, pulmonary disorders, ophthalmological diseases and injuries, and urological diseases as well as cosmetic indications. Many of these marketing claims raise significant ethical issues given the lack of peer-reviewed evidence that advertised stem cell interventions are safe and efficacious for the treatment of particular diseases. Such promotional claims also generate regulatory concerns due to apparent noncompliance with federal regulations.

Unfortunately, these US businesses are less unlike the stem cell tourist clinics that Ive written about before than I would like.

I thought about perusing the list of clinics in more detail and picking out the most egregious examples other than RMG, but that can wait for a potential future post. (It is, after all, a holiday weekend, and well be having visitors.) So instead Ill move on to conclude with the question that many of you are probably wondering after seeing an example such as treating autism with stem cells: What the heck is the FDA doing?

This isnt as simple as it sounds. For one thing, as noted in Turner and Knoepflers supplemental methods section:

However, it should be noted that according to 21 CFR 1271.3 (d) (4), minimally manipulated bone marrow for homologous use does not require pre-marketing approval by the FDA. 21 CFR 1271.15 (b) states that facilities removing cells or tissues from an individual and implanting those cells or tissues in the same individual during the same surgical procedure likewise do not require premarketing approval. In addition, federal regulations contain detailed criteria specifying when autologous or allogeneic cells can be used without first obtaining FDA premarketing approval. These criteria are identified in 21 CFR 1271.10. We mention these important sections of 21 CFR 1271 for a reason. Our goal was to identify businesses that engage in direct-to-consumer marketing of stem cell interventions and fit within our inclusion criteria. Judgments about regulatory compliance or noncompliance had no bearing on whether specific businesses were included in our database. Federal regulations governing marketing, manufacture, administration, and registration of cell-based interventions are complex, products are classified into different risk- based regulatory tiers, and we in no way wish to claim or imply that inclusion of particular businesses in Supplemental Table 1 means that they are noncompliant with federal regulations. Such determinations, as well as other assessments of regulatory compliance, must be made by legally authorized regulatory agencies after rigorous evaluation processes.

This is, of course, the reason why so many of these businesses offeror claim to offerbone marrow or adipose stem cells. If they dont manipulate the cells too much, they can skirt FDA regulations, although the FDA is moving to crack down on unproven stem cell treatments and have started to issue warning letters. Its a complex issue, but its hard not to look at the number of clinics and the breadth of health claims documented by Turner and Knoepfler and not come to the conclusion that there is a serious problem here. Its also clear that big money and political interests are hindering the FDA. For example:

Some proponents of deregulation argue that current federal regulations governing the advertising, processing, and administration of autologous stem cells are too onerous and have resulted in few approved stem cell therapies reaching the American marketplace (Chirba and Garfield, 2011, McAllister et al., 2012). The REGROW Act is an example of the current push from some political quarters and even from some individual stem cell researchers for lowering safety and efficacy standards for adult stem cell-based interventions. However, we found that hundreds of U.S. businesses are already promoting stem cell interventions for an extraordinary range of clinical indications. Advocates of deregulation will perhaps be pleased by our findings that many putative stem cell interventions are currently available for sale in the U.S. In contrast, proponents of a marketplace in which cell-based therapies have traditionally been tested for safety and efficacy and subject to pre-marketing review by the FDA will likely be concerned by how many U.S. businesses are currently marketing stem cell interventions. We are particularly concerned that we found many advertising claims related to ALS, Alzheimers disease, Parkinsons disease, and many other conditions for which there is no established scientific consensus that proven safe and efficacious stem cell treatments now exist.

The REGROW Act sounds a lot like the 21st Century Cures Act, ideologically-driven solutions that mistakenly argue that the way to let loose a torrent of cures for every disease imaginable is to unleash the power of the market through deregulation. In the case of the 21st Century Cures Act, its proponents propose to give the NIH a bit more money in return for weakening the FDA. Its basically a solution to a nonexistent problem. The REGROW Act is cut from the same cloth, as it would allow provisional approval of stem cell therapies without phase III trials and establishing a conditional approval paradigm. Together with right to try laws, the REGROW Act and the 21st Century Cures Act are of a piece with a libertarian, free market-driven agenda to hamper government regulatory agencies. Fortunately, the the REGROW Act v.2.0 appears to be going nowhere fast. Meanwhile these stem cell clinics are scrambling to deny that they are doing anything unethical, illegal, or dangerous.

Perusing some of the websites, I couldnt help but notice how dubious stem cell therapies seem to have found a comfortable home in alternative medicine clinics. Perhaps the most blatant example I found was the Purety Family Medical Clinic, which advertises itself as holistic medicine specialists for women, men, and pediatrics as well as prolotherapy, IV, ozone, chelation, HRT and FMT. Right alongside stem cell injections for badly injured or degenerated tissue, Purety also offers chelation therapy for heavy metal detoxification, high dose vitamin C drips, ozone therapy for cancer, naturopathy, fecal transplants for a variety of illnesses, and, yes, homeopathy, The One Quackery to Rule Them All.

Unfortunately, given how potentially promising stem cell therapies are, right now they are tainted by association with quackery like that described above. Basically, stem cells are being sold as being every bit as magical as alternative medicine like homeopathy. However, as PZ Myers points out:

Stem cells are not magic. They are plastic cells that are pluripotent they can differentiate into a variety of different tissues. But they need instructions and signals in order to develop in a constructive way, and the hard part is reconstructing environmental cues to shape their actions. Theyre like Lego building blocks you can build model spaceships or submarines or houses with them, and they have a lot of creative potential, but its not enough to just throw the Lego blocks into a bag and shake them really hard.

Thats what these stem cell clinics are doing, injecting stem cells and hoping they do their thing without knowing how the body induces them to do their thing, all while charging patients large sums of money for the privilege of being in what is in essence a poorly designed, poorly regulated clinical trial.

I dont know about you, but if I were a legitimate advocate of stem cell therapies, Id be very disturbed at how easily stem cell therapies are currently integrated with pure quackery like chelation therapy and homeopathy. Being so easily associated with clinics like Purety is not a good way to make stem cell treatments respectable, but it is a good way to make a lot of money if you arent that concerned with medical evidence or ethicsat least until the next Jim Gass hits the news.

Read more here:
Stem cell tourism: A problem right here in the good ol ...

Read More...

Whats the harm? Stem cell tourism edition Science-Based …

Thursday, August 4th, 2016

Posted by David Gorski on June 27, 2016

Whats the harm? Stroke victim Jim Gass went from requiring a cane and leg brace to walk to being confined to a wheelchair, thanks to dubious stem cell treatments. Theres the harm.

Its been over two weeks now since hockey legend Gordie Howe died at the age of 88. Detroit, as Ive pointed out elsewhere, is a serious hockey town, as hockey-crazy as any town in Canada (just look at the fancy new hockey arena named after crappy pizza being built downtown only a mile from where I work), and it worshiped Gordie Howe for as long as I can remember growing up here.

The reason I mentioned this is because in late 2014, Howe suffered a series of debilitating strokes that brought him close to death. He survived, but with major neurologic deficits. As a result of Gordie Howes fame, representatives of a company known as Stemedica who were also fans of Gordie Howe and whose company is developing stem cell treatments for a variety of illnesses, approached the family and persuaded them to take Gordie Howe to the Novastem Clinic in Tijuana, a clinic that to me appeared to exist mainly as a means for patients not eligible for Stemedicas clinical trials in the US to receive Stemedicas stem cells outside of a clinical trial, cash on the barrelhead, no questions asked. In a rather ethically dubious move that could only be viewed as paying for publicity (which it got in abundance), Stemedica administered its stem cells to Gordie Howe for free. If youre not Gordie Howe, however, itll cost you about $32,000.

As is the case for most anecdotes like this, Gordie Howe did improve. That is not surprising, because, as Steve Novella, who is a neurologist and thus takes care of stroke patients as part of his practice, told me at the time, the natural history of stroke is neurologic recovery that eventually plateaus several months after the stroke. This occurs as the inflammation from the initial stroke abates and as much regeneration as the body can muster occurs. Also, as I noted before, Howe had a hemorrhagic stroke, which is more dangerous and likely to kill early but, if the victim survives, he is more likely to experience better functional recovery than in the case of the much more common ischemic stroke, in which a blood clot clogs a blood vessel, resulting in the death of brain tissue supplied by that vessel. In any case, as I described in a three part series of posts (part one, part two, part three), its impossible to know whether the stem cell infusion that Howe underwent had anything whatsoever with his partial recovery that allowed him to make a few public appearances in 2015 and 2016.

Unfortunately, the offer by Dr. Maynard Howe (CEO) and Dave McGuigan (VP) of Stemedica Cell Technologies to treat Gordie Howe at Novastem worked brilliantly. Gordie Howe quickly became the poster child for dubious stem cell therapies. Local and national news aired credulous, feel-good human interest stories about his seemingly miraculous recovery, while Keith Olbermann practically served as a pitch man for Stemedica and didnt take kindly at all to any criticism of hisshall we say?enthusiastic coverage. The predominant angle taken in stories about Gordie Howe was he had undergone Stemedicas stem cell therapy and, as result, enjoyed a miraculous recovery from his stroke. The vast majority of news coverage also tended to present the magic of stem cell therapies credulously, as all benefit and no risk, as a qualitative analysis published last year clearly showed, finding that the efficacy of stem cell treatments is often assumed in news coverage and readers comments and that media coverage that presents uncritical perspectives on unproven stem cell therapies may create patient expectations, may have an affect [sic] on policy discussions, and help to feed the marketing of unproven therapies.

No kidding.

Why, you might ask, am I reminding you of Gordie Howes use of stem cells to treat his strokes? Simple, it became part of a marketing blitz, credulously swallowed whole by Keith Olbermann and many reporters, for unproven stem cell therapies, which have been portrayed as very promising (which is likely true, although that promise hasnt yet been proven or realized) and harmless, which is definitely not true, as evidenced by the story of Jim Gass, as published last week in The New England Journal of Medicine, The New York Times, The Boston Globe, and a variety of other media. Before I discuss Mr. Gass in more detail, however, lets recap a bit about stem cells.

Stem cells are, as I have discussed before, moving from cutting edge science to applied science. The problem, of course, is that with few exceptions they have not yet been translated into safe and effective treatments. Enter the quacks, who make magical claims for stem cells every bit as implausible as any claim made for reiki or homeopathy.

There are two types of stem cells, embryonic stem cells and adult stem cells. The first (and potentially most useful for the widest variety of conditions) are pluripotent, which means that, given the right signals, they are able to differentiate into all derivatives of the three primary germ layers in the embryo: ectoderm, endoderm and mesoderm. In other words, they are able to become virtually any kind of cell. You can easily see why embryonic stem cells are attractive as a treatment: In theory, they could be used to replace or repair any organ or tissue, if only they can be targeted to where they are needed and the correct signals are deduced to induce them to differentiate into the needed cell type(s). Unfortunately, these are enormous challenges. Thats even ignoring the religious objections to the use of these cells, whose isolation requires the destruction of embryos.

The second kind of stem cell is known as adult stem cells. Adult stem cells are undifferentiated cells that remain in children and adults and can proliferate to replenish dying cells and regenerate damaged tissues. They are also known as somatic stem cells. Their defining properties include, as for embryonic stem cells, self-renewal (the ability to divide indefinitely while remaining undifferentiated) and multipotency, the ability to differentiate into several, but not all, cell types. In contrast to embryonic stem cells, though, adult stem cells are limited in the types of cells into which they can regenerate. For example, there are hematopoietic stem cells, which can give rise to all the types of blood cells: red blood cells, B lymphocytes, T lymphocytes, natural killer cells, neutrophils, basophils, eosinophils, monocytes, and macrophages; mesenchymal stem cells, which can give rise to a variety of cell types: bone cells (osteoblasts and osteocytes), cartilage cells (chondrocytes), fat cells (adipocytes), and stromal cells that support blood formation; and neural stem cells, which are found in the brain and can produce the brains three major cell types: nerve cells (neurons) and two categories of non-neuronal cellsastrocytes and oligodendrocytes.

Finally, there is a cell type known as an induced pluripotent stem cell (iPSC), which are adult stem cells that have been genetically manipulated to express genes and factors important for maintaining the defining properties of embryonic stem cells, but it is not yet known whether these cells can be used as embryonic stem cells and their uses now, for the most part, consist of in vitro studies and show potential usefulness in transplantation medicine. One problem with iPSCs is that viral vectors are needed to introduce the genes that dedifferentiate the adult stem cells, making their use in humans as yet problematic.

When it comes to translating what we know thus far about the basic science of stem cells, here remain many problems to be overcome, such as how to target the cells, how to induce them to differentiate properly, and how to prevent them from becoming cancers, this last problem being the crux of the story of Jim Gass. Thus far, in general, most attempted clinical uses of stem cells involve the isolation of these cells from either the bone marrow or blood (or sometimes from adipose tissue). My basic opinion is that, outside of hematopoietic malignancies, for which bone marrow ablation and stem cell transplantation have been a standard of care for many years, most adult stem cell applications are not ready for prime time yet and should not be administered outside of the context of an IRB-approved clinical trial (not dubious clinical trials in Mexico, where, as I discussed in the context of the story of Gordie Howe, the standards are so lax).

The NYT story about Jim Gass is entitled A Cautionary Tale of Stem Cell Tourism, and you can see why from the very first passage:

The surgeon gasped when he opened up his patient and saw what was in his spine. It was a huge mass, filling the entire part of the mans lower spinal column.

The entire thing was filled with bloody tissue, and as I started to take pieces, it started to bleed, said Dr. John Chi, the director of Neurosurgical Spine Cancer at Brigham and Womens Hospital in Boston. It was stuck to everything around it.

He added, I had never seen anything like it.

Tests showed that the mass was made up of abnormal, primitive cells and that it was growing very aggressively. Then came the real shocker: The cells did not come from Jim Gass. They were someone elses cells.

Mr. Gass, it turned out, had had stem cell therapy at clinics in Mexico, China and Argentina, paying tens of thousands of dollars each time for injections in a desperate attempt to recover from a stroke he had in 2009. The total cost with travel was close to $300,000.

Like Gordie Howe, Mr. Gass, a former chief legal counsel for Sylvania who lives in San Diego, was a stroke victim. As described in the article, Gass problems began on May 10, 2009, when he woke with a terrible headache. He fell to the floor, unable to move. Two years after his stroke, he was able to walk with a leg brace and a cane, as his left arm was useless, and his left leg was weak. He was also a perfect mark for the stem cell clinics: Desperate enough to try almost anything and wealthy enough to be able to afford to spend $300,000 over several years chasing a cure. And where did he turn first?

Uh-oh:

I began doing research on the internet, Mr. Gass said. He was particularly struck by the tale of the former football star and professional golfer John Brodie who had a stroke, received stem cell therapy in Russia and returned to playing golf again.

So Mr. Gass contacted a company, Stemedica, that had been involved with the clinic, and learned about a program in Kazakhstan. When Mr. Gass balked at going there, the Russian clinic referred him to a clinic in Mexico. That was the start of his odyssey.

The program in Kazakhstan to which Mr. Gass was referred by Stemedica appears to have been Altaco XXI, which is the distributor for Stemedica products there. Now, you might be suspicious of a stem cell therapy that is administered in Kazakhstan, and you would have reason to be. On its website, Stemedica includes a slide show about Kazakhstan that presents it as very modern, particularly Astana, where one finds the National Research Medical Center (NRMC), which Stemedica advertises on its YouTube channel with a promotional video:

Of course, I dont know for sure that Mr. Gass was referred to the National Research Medical Center in Astana. Oddly enough, none of the stories about him that I read specifically name any of the clinics where he was referred or treated, other than to state that they were in Kazakhstan, Mexico, China, and Argentina, something I find very frustrating, as I wanted to check out their websites and see what sorts of claims they were making. In fact, in a local story revisiting Gordie Howes case in light of Mr. Gass complication, its explicitly noted that the story has been updated to remove a reference to where Jim Gass was treated. Very odd indeed. One wonders if there were legal threats. I only inferred that it was likely that Stemedica referred Gass to the NRMC in Astana based on its relationship and its featuring an NRMC video on its YouTube page. Its quite possible, albeit from what I can tell unlikely, that it was somewhere else.

Wherever Mr. Gass was referred first, wherever he ended up being treated, this all sounds very familiar, as its similar to what Stemedica did with Gordie Howe: If the patients not eligible for one of its US clinical trials, refer the patient to an international location to receive its product. In Howes case, it was to Clinica Santa Clarita, a Tijuana clinic that uses Stemedica products through a Mexican company called Novastem. In Mr. Gass case, it was (very likely) the National Research Medical Center in Kazakhstan. Mr. Gass didnt want to go to Kazakhstan, however; so the NRMC referred him to a clinic in Mexico, and Mr. Gasss odyssey began, ultimately encompassing three different countries. I dont know whether or not it was Clinica Santa Clarita, the same clinic that treated Gordie Howe, where Gass was treated. I perused a bunch of news stories about him and couldnt find the name of any of the actual clinics where Mr. Gass was treated listed anywhere (which, again, I found very odd). In a way, I suppose it doesnt matter, although, given my blogging about Gordie Howe, I couldnt help but note the Stemedica connection to Mr. Gass story.

What is, unfortunately, not surprising is that Mr. Gass was snared the same way so many patients are snared, as the NYT described. Also, he didnt listen to his doctors or his sister-in-law:

Mr. Gasss doctors and his sister-in-law, Ruth Gass, tried to dissuade him. Ms. Gass called the clinics and demanded evidence that their treatments worked.

Some of the clinics hung up, saying they would not talk to a terrified relative, she said. Websites often had data but it did not hold up to basic analysis, Ms. Gass said, and when the data was published, it appeared in vanity journals. Other clinics simply told her, People get dramatically better.

She raged against the clinics, telling them: You ought to be ashamed for charging $40,000 a shot. You prey on people like my brother-in-law who is desperate for help.

Then came her kicker: I said, If what you are saying is true, you should get the Nobel Prize. If not, you ought to go to hell. Shame on you.

But Mr. Gass was undeterred. He was willing to spend his money and go anywhere. What did he have to lose? The worst that could happen, he thought, is that he would have no improvement.

Unfortunately, Mr. Gass was very much mistaken, even though the efforts of his sister-in-law went much further than the efforts of most concerned relatives go to find out the truth and dissuade their loved one from an unwise course of action came to naught.

So what happened? Lets take a look at the NEJM letter.

The news coverage Mr. Gass received was important because it revealed that he was the patient described in a letter to the NEJM. The authors, Dr. Aaron Berkowitz et al from Brigham and Womens Hospital, note that the patient was not taking any immunosuppressive drugs, an important point because it means that there was no reason to suspect that he was immunosuppressed and therefore more susceptible to tumor formation. They also note that the clinics described what they injected as a combination of mesenchymal, embryonic, and fetal neural stem cells. The timing isnt well described in the letter, but I found out from other sources that after his last injection in Mexico in September 2014, Mr. Gass developed progressive lower back pain, paraplegia, and urinary incontinence, which lead to an MRI that showed a lesion of the thoracic spinal cord and thecal sac. Berkowitz et al described the lesion thusly:

Neuropathological analysis revealed a densely cellular, highly proliferative, primitive neoplasm with glial differentiation. Short tandem repeat DNA fingerprinting analysis indicated that the mass was predominantly composed of nonhost cells (see the Supplementary Appendix, available with the full text of this letter at NEJM.org). On the basis of histopathological and molecular studies, this glioproliferative lesion appeared to have originated from the intrathecally introduced exogenous stem cells. The lesion had some features that overlapped with malignant gliomas (nuclear atypia, a high proliferation index, glial differentiation, and vascular proliferation) but did not show other features typical of cancer (no cancer-associated genetic aberrations were detected on next-generation sequencing of 309 cancer-associated genes [see the Supplementary Appendix]). Thus, although the lesion may be a considered a neoplasm (i.e., a new growth), it could not be assigned to any category of previously described human neoplasm on the basis of the data we gathered.

So this mass consisted of non-host cells (i.e., not Mr. Gass cells) and was unlike any category of human neoplasm ever described. Given that this tumor, whatever it was, grew very close to where the stem cells (or whatever the various clinics injected) had been injected into the spinal canal, and was largely made up of non-host cells, its hard not to come to any other conclusion other than that this tumor was a result of the stem cell injections. Its not the first case described either. As Berkowitz et al note, there have been reports of proliferative tumors as a result of stem cell therapy published in the literature before, one a brain tumor.

That tumor formation can be a complication of stem cell therapies should not be in the least bit surprising. The cells are at the very least, multipotent, and, if embryonic, pluripotent. As such, they share many characteristics with tumor cells, not the least of which is being immortal (capable of dividing indefinitely) and being able to invade normal tissue. Indeed, this is the very complication that legitimate stem cell researchers do what they can to prevent, and the authors of the NEJM letter note that legitimate stem cell researchers have attempted to reduce the risk of stem-cellrelated tumors in clinical trials by means of the measured administration of pluripotent stem cells or by differentiating stem cells in vitro into postmitotic phenotypes before administration, something that these stem cell tourism clinics are not exactly what Id call vigilant about doing.

There are few areas of biomedical research that have been the subject of such intense press coverage and hype as stem cell therapies. Its not hard to see why stem cells have so captured the imagination of people all over the developed world. In theory, stem cells show extraordinary promise, with the potential to produce game-changing treatments for a wide array of injuries and ailments through their ability, if we can just find out how to activate it, to repair and replace damaged and malfunctioning tissues and organs. Theyre also controversial, especially embryonic stem cells, which run afoul of religious beliefs to the point where conducting such research in the US is difficult. Indeed, Tim Caulfield and Amy McGuire have referred to stem cells as nothing short of a pop culture phenomenon, promoted in particular by the examples of famous athletes using stem cell therapies for a variety of ailments:

Over the past few years, a new dimension of science hype has emerged: the well-publicized use of stem cell therapies by high-profile athletes. Starting with the 2011 story of New York Yankee pitcher Bartolo Colon receiving cell therapy for a chronic shoulder injury and gaining momentum with the announcement of Peyton Mannings neck treatment in Germany, stories of athletes using stem cell treatments as a recovery aid have become common.

Gordie Howe was another example, although he didnt seek out stem cell treatments for a sports-related injury but rather for a far more serious condition. He was aided and abetted by executives at Stemedica, who, through their admiration for Gordie Howe and very likely a keen eye for ways to garner publicity, invited Howes family to receive their stem cell treatment free of charge. While one cant blame a patient with a serious, currently untreatable condition like a stroke, such as Gordie Howe or Jim Gass, for being desperate enough to try anything, one can blame the companies that make claims not backed by science.

Caulfield and McGuire go on to say:

As noted by numerous scholars, only a few stem cell therapies are currently supported by good scientific data. However, despite this clinical reality, unproven stem cell therapies are being marketed to patients throughout the world. The clinics that offer these services often operate outside of ethical or regulatory oversight and exploit individuals at their most vulnerable by offering unproven treatments for incurable and debilitating diseases.

Ask yourself this: Why are so many of these clinics located in countries like Kazakhstan, China, Mexico, and Argentina? Its not because the scientific facilities are so much more advanced there. Its because regulatory oversight protecting patients is lax to nonexistent. For instance, as I discussed in the context of Gordie Howes case, in Mexico Novastem and its Clinica Santa Clarita, which is where stem cells are administered, are federally licensed to use stem cells as the doctor sees fit. Thus, any clinic that is federally licensed can administer stem cells however its doctors wish, regardless of whether they are qualified to administer such treatments or not. As I said at the time, learning this actually opened my eyes greatly as to how a weak regulatory environment in Mexico allows all sorts of dubious stem cell clinics to thrive there. No doubt the same is true in Kazakhstan and other countries with clinics favored by stem cell tourists. Thats not to say that there arent for-profit stem cell clinics in the US. There are, thanks to some loopholes in FDA regulations.

You might wonder how athletes are similar to more desperate patients like Jim Gass. Caulfield and McGuire note:

It is well known that professional athletes will do almost anything to keep a competitive edge or speed recovery from an injury. These characteristics make them an ideal market (and, one could argue, a vulnerable market) for unproven treatments such as those promoted by stem cell clinics throughout the world.

Just as professional athletes will do almost anything to maintain a competitive edge or to recover from injury faster, patients with serious medical conditions for which conventional medicine offers little, such as chronic neurologic deficits secondary to stroke or injury (patients with spinal cord injuries are common recipients of dubious stem cell therapies), feel an even more intense form of the same desperation. The difference is that professional athletes are celebrities, and their testimonials have the power to influence such desperate patients to try unproven stem cell therapies. Indeed, it was the story of pro quarterback John Brodies recovery from stroke that most influenced Mr. Gass to contact Stemedica, whose cells had been used to treat Brodie. The press, particularly the sports press (as exemplified by Keith Olbermanns credulity about Gordie Howes story), love human interest stories of people surmounting all odds to triumph. With few exceptions, they tend not to look too skeptically at the claims being made for stem cell therapies because that would harsh the buzz of a great human interest story. Indeed, I caught a fair amount of flak for just that when I wrote about Gordie Howe.

Advocates of such therapies often ask, Whats the harm? After all, Mr. Gass had a useless arm, a weak leg, and was willing to try anything. Well, hows he doing now? Hes paralyzed from the neck down, except for his right arm, incontinent, and experiencing severe back pain. Worse, as the NYT story notes, his doctors do not know how to stop his tumor from growing:

But now that the doctors knew what the mass was, they were left with another problem: How could they stop it from growing? If it had been an infection, they could have used antibiotics. If it had been cancer, they could have used drugs to target it. This mass, though, was unique.

They decided to try radiation. It seemed to slow the masss growth a bit, maybe even shrink it. But recently, Mr. Gass has had another scan in San Diego, and doctors told him that the mass was growing again.

Asked what he would like others to learn from his experience, Mr. Gass said, Dont trust anecdotes.

His sister-in-law had a different reply: If something sounds too good to be true, it is.

Indeed. Unfortunately, descriptions of stem cells that are too good to be true are the primary means by which dubious stem cell clinics advertise their treatmentsthat, and testimonials from famous athletes like Gordie Howe and John Brodie. The harm consists of patients paying tensor even hundredsof thousands of dollars for unproven treatments unlikely to benefit them, patients like Mr. Gass, and interference with legitimate scientific research and clinical trials to determine if stem cell therapies can work and what theyre useful for.

Unfortunately, when it comes to stem cell clinics and the companies that supply them, all too often its money first, science later if at all.

Tags: Astana, Clnica Santa Clarita, Dave McGuigan, Gordie Howe, Jim Gass, Kazakhstan, Keith Olbermann, Maynard Howe, National Research Medical Center, Novastem, stem cells, Stemedica Cell Technologies

Posted in: Clinical Trials, Ethics, Health Fraud, Science and the Media

Excerpt from:
Whats the harm? Stem cell tourism edition Science-Based ...

Read More...

Stem cell tourism | Harvard Stem Cell Institute (HSCI)

Sunday, August 16th, 2015

False hope for real money

Internet sites for clinics all around the worldincluding the US, but especially in China, India, the Caribbean, Latin America, and nations of the former Soviet Unionoffer stem-cell-based treatments for people suffering from a dizzying array of serious conditions.

Never mind that cancer is the only disease category for which there is published, scientifically valid evidence showing that stem cell therapy may help. Thousands, if not tens of thousands, of desperate people are flocking to clinics that charge tens of thousands of dollars for every unproven treatment.

Traveling for therapy, or stem cell tourism, was the subject of a panel discussion titled Stem Cell Therapy and Medical Tourism: Of Promise and Peril? arranged by HSCI in collaboration with the Petrie-Flom Center for Health Law Policy, Biotechnology, and Bioethics.

Brock Reeve, HSCI executive director, introduced the topic by pointing out that there are positive and negative aspects to medical tourism. For example, patients flock from all over the world to the Harvard-affiliated Massachusetts General Hospital, Brigham and Womens Hospital, Dana-Farber Center Institute, and other Boston research hospitals for cutting-edge, scientifically validated treatments for a host of diseases.

But then there is the other kind of medical tourism, and every member of the panel agreed with speaker Timothy A. Caulfield, LL.M, the Canada Research chair in health, law, and policy at the University of Alberta, when he said that the stem cell tourism phenomenon hurts the legitimacy of the entire field of stem cell science and medicine.

While adult stem cells have been used for decades to treat a number of malignanciesbone marrow transplants are, in fact, are the only stem cell treatments that are not experimental.

George Daley, MD, PhD, a member of the Harvard Stem Cell Institutes executive committee and past president of the International Society for Stem Cell Research, added that we are seeing a growing number [of legitimate clinical trials] but all such uses are experimental ... and there is great skepticism as to whether we have the scientific knowledge and basis even to predict that these will be effective. It may, he said, take decades before there is certainty. The only stem cell therapies that have been proven safe and effective, he said, are those constituting what is known as bone marrow transplantation for treatment of some cancers.

But the clinics selling stem cell therapy for a sweeping catalog of diseases arent offering patients places in clinical trials. They are touting what they claim are established treatments, with proven results. Caulfield said a number of his studies demonstrate that treatments are offered as safe, routine, and effective, but none of what is being offered matched what the scientific literature said. He accused the clinics of financial exploitation of desperate people, and said those who raise money to finance pilgrimages to them are raising money to turn over to a fraud.

I. Glenn Cohen, JD, professor at Harvard Law School and co-director of the Petrie-Flom Center, suggested that one way to slow stem cell tourism could be to prosecute for child abuse when the treatment involves minors. Cohen said that though he is sympathetic with parents seeking help for their ill children, this falls under existing child-abuse and neglect statutes.

Jill Lepore, PhD, chair of Harvards History and Literature Program, came at the issues from a very different perspective. I dont have patients, Lepore said, I have characters. She said there is a kind of faith in science that draws some people to any promise of a cure for disease, no matter how specious. What fuels this false hope, she said, is one of the most dangerous elements of our culture: that we have forgotten how to die.

See the article here:
Stem cell tourism | Harvard Stem Cell Institute (HSCI)

Read More...

tourism

Sunday, August 16th, 2015

I am very grateful to ProgenCell for giving me back the full use of my leg. About five years ago I fractured my kneecap playing volleyball in college. My orthopedic surgeon wanted to operate but he couldnt guarantee success and even mentioned that there was a big chance that things would come out even worse than before, so I decided to let my knee heal on its own.

This has meant five years of pain and reduced mobility. During one of my periodic consultations with the orthopedic surgeon, he mentioned having read some reports in the international journals where stem cells had been used successfully. That made me curious and I started looking around the Internet to see whats available.

What I found was confusing at first and sounded contradictory. So many kinds of stem cells and used in so many different ways! Some of the clinics that I contacted wouldnt even give me the details of their treatments. Then a friend told me about ProgenCell and I was pleasantly surprised to learn how close they are to my home. I was able to visit them before deciding, and that helped me a lot.

My first visit to Tijuana was a real eye-opener. Not only has it become famous for stem cells, thanks to Bart Starrs story, but it is also a very nice place to walk around. I felt safer there than I do at home. Returning home was a breeze because ProgenCell gave me a pass to a restricted car lane just for medical tourists.

I had my first treatment a couple of months ago. It took only an hour or so, which gave me plenty of free time to visit Tijuanas colorful open-air market, its Cultural Center, and some really great restaurants. I was even able to visit an English-speaking dentist who charged me a fourth of what I would pay back home. This is not the city I used to hear about on television! My visits have been relaxing, rewarding and very interesting.

My stem cell treatment didnt make me feel like a different person right away. My doctors told me to expect that it would take some time for the cells to work their magic. The improvement was gradual but there seems to be more movement in my knee and Ive noticed recently that Im not refilling my pain prescription as often as I used to. ProgenCells solution has been like a miracle. Thank you so much, ProgenCell. I am looking forward to my next visit.

Sandra R.

Like Loading...

See the rest here:
tourism

Read More...

Stem Cell Therapy in Mexico

Sunday, August 2nd, 2015

Stem Cell MX is dedicated to providing COPD and heart disease patients with information about stem cell therapy at Angeles Health International, Mexicos largest private hospital network.

Stem Cell Therapy is a fast growing area of medical research. Research into how stem cells can cure a number of conditions has been extensive over the past 3 decades and here at Stem Cell MX we are proud to be at the forefront of breakthrough discoveries and treatments. We dedicate ourselves to providing you with information about Stem Cells and what they can do for you.

At Stem Cell MX we can use Stem Cell therapy to treat 11 core treatable conditions including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), heart conditions and joint conditions, such as osteoarthritis. We use two types of stem cell programs; autologous, meaning that we use your own stem cells, and allogeneic, where we use donated adult stem cells from one of the best labs in the world.

Stem cell research has had bad press over the years due to the misconception that Stem Cells can only come from embryos. This isnt true. Here at Stem Cell MX we only use Adult Stem Cells which have been harvested from either the donor or the patients themselves.

If you want to find out more about stem cell therapy with no obligation then contact us today. Our stem cell clinical trials are based on thirty years of research and clinical experience conducted by leading researchers and clinicians in Europe and the United States.

To find out the basics about stem cells read An Introduction to Stem Cells

See more here:
Stem Cell Therapy in Mexico

Read More...

stem cell research. | Medical Tourism in Peru

Saturday, August 1st, 2015

The decision to seek treatment overseas is not easy. The concerns are huge: How will the quality compare? Will they be able to understand me? What happens if there are complications? These are issues that face every patient, regardless of whether you go to your local hospital or across the world. Initially what made medical travel appealing is that the costs are often times significant (maybe 80% less than in the US). Now, however, it is not just about cost. It is about quality care. Learn Mo...

Many inbound tourists travel to Peru for dental treatments, plastic surgery, laser operations and fertility treatments. The vast majority of Perus medical tourism infrastructure is located in Lima. One area in which Peru excels is the access to regenerative, stem cell-based medicine. Learn More Contact us and let us know how we can help you Medical Disclaimer Medical information or statements made within this site are not intended for use in or as a substitute for the diagnos...

Peru is noted for having one of the finest physicians treating Parkinson's disease. Using astem cell therapies that utilizes bone marrow from the patient and a intricate application directly into the patient using precision guided catheterization, this procedures has been embraced by hundreds of patients worldwide. Contact us and let us know how we can help you Medical Disclaimer Medical information or statements made within this site are not intended for use in or as a s...

Read more here:
stem cell research. | Medical Tourism in Peru

Read More...

Stem Cells – SciTechStory

Sunday, July 12th, 2015

Stem cells are often in the news. These days its usually about some advance in research. Sometimes the controversy about using embryonic stem cells resurfaces. Despite all the coverage (pro or con) stem cells are not well understood. What are they and why are they important?

In more ways than one, its the potential of stem cells that makes them important. At the moment most of the work with stem cells is still in the laboratory; but thats changing. Within the next few years stem cells, in one form or another, will be at work in medical applications such as repairing a damaged pancreas or a heart. In fact, stem cells will be used to repair or even re-grow tissues all over the body skin, liver, lungs, bone marrow. The production of stem cells, their delivery, and procedures for using them will become the basis of an industry. In the not too distant future stem cells, or the knowledge we gain from working with them, will be used in sophisticated repair of the brain and as part of the development of replacement organs. The potential is enormous.

What are stem cells?

Stem cells are found in most multicellular creatures and come in different varieties; all have an important ability: They can fully reproduce themselves almost indefinitely. For example, in mammals like human beings, blood stem cells (hematopoietic stem cells) are active all our lives in the marrow of bones, where they continually produce the many different kinds of blood cells. Therein is another key property for most stem cells; they can become other kinds of cells. The word for this process is differentiate; blood stem cells can differentiate into red blood cells, white blood cells, blood platelets and so forth. The ability to produce different kinds of cells is why stem cells may be used, for example, to repair or replace damaged heart cells something mature heart cells cannot do on their own.

Stem cell jargon

When you read about stem cells, there are a number of words that jump out jargon, yes, but still descriptive. Stem cells are classified by their potency, that is, what other kinds of cells they can become, or put another way, their ability to differentiate into other cells. There is a rank order from more to less potent:

Totipotent sometimes also called omnipotent stem cells can construct a complete and viable organism. In short, they are the same as a cell created by the fusion of the egg and a sperm (an embryonic cell). Totipotent cells can become any type of cell.

Pluripotent stem cells are derived from totipotent cells and are nearly as versatile. They can become any type of cell, except embryonic.

Multipotent stem cells can become a wide variety of cells, but only those of a close family, for example blood stem cells (hematopoietic cells) can become any of the blood cells, but not other kinds of cells.

Oligopotent stem cells are limited to becoming specific types of cells, such as endoderm, ectoderm, and mesoderm.

Excerpt from:
Stem Cells - SciTechStory

Read More...

Stem cell tourism: The risks of unproven therapies …

Saturday, July 11th, 2015

Medical travel for unproven stem-cell-based therapies is commonly referred to as stem cell tourism. Clinics worldwide over-promise the benefits of their so-called treatments and grossly downplay or ignore the risks. Such unproven therapy is without scientific rationale. Neither the efficacy of the treatments, nor the lack of serious side effects has been shown in animal models. This 'magic cure by stem cells' approach must be condemned under all circumstances. If there is no chance of improvement in the patients condition, the 'therapy' is both unethical and scientifically and clinically unacceptable. It will not help the patient; the risks for adverse effects may be high; and it will not contribute to the development of clinically-established stem cell therapies. Even if the administration of stem cells is associated with negligible or minor risks, clinical application remains unjustified on a compassionate basis: the patient's expectations will not be met and they are very likely to suffer emotionally as a result. The solution must be to encourage governments to tighten regulations and to better educate patient-consumers.

See the rest here:
Stem cell tourism: The risks of unproven therapies ...

Read More...

Stem cell clinic opens in Mandaue | Sun.Star

Sunday, June 28th, 2015

GOVERNMENT needs to ramp up its efforts to get its share of the global medical tourism market, an industry player said.

Medical tourism in the country is picking up as more foreign patients seek medical services here. As a regional player, we are slowly catching up with our neighbors like Thailand and Korea, said Dr. Roderick Yalung, medical director of Regenestem in the Philippines.

He noted that a lot of hospitals and health and wellness centers in the country are now affiliated with institutions abroad, and that many medical centers and clinics have innovated and now use state-of-the-art facilities.

Yalung believes the Philippines is well positioned for medical tourism because we offer cheaper services yet high-quality medical attention, plus a variety of destinations to offer while patients recuperate.

He pointed out that a breast augmentation package would cost $8,000 to $10,000. This already covers hotel accommodations and round-trip fares plus a visit to a local tourism destination. The same amount would cover only the cost of the procedure, he said, in the United States.

We really have advantages, thats why the industry is calling on the government to fund medical tourism because this could be a revenue driver for the economy, Yalung said. Government support was a key factor in the thriving medical tourism industry in countries like Thailand, Korea and Singapore, he added.

In a 2010 study, the Philippines ranked 11th in the top 15 destinations for medical tourists in the world, with Thailand and Singapore in the top two slots.

According to a 2013 report by the Philippine Institute of Development Studies, one of the problems is the lack of information such as medical tourist arrivals, expenditures, and services.

Yalung was recently in Cebu to open Regenestem, its first clinic in the Visayas and the second clinic in Asia of the Global Stem Cell Group, which offers the most comprehensive and up-to-date stem cell treatments. Regenestem Cebu is located at Block 88 of Oakridge Business Park on A.S. Fortuna in Mandaue City. It also offers services like cosmetic surgery, anti-ageing, dermatology, regenerative medicine, sports and arthritis medicine, and molecular orthopedics.

We decided to open in Cebu because of its robust tourism and we believe there is a ready market for these kinds of medical services, said Yalung.

Read the original post:
Stem cell clinic opens in Mandaue | Sun.Star

Read More...

Vietnam Stem Cell Medical Tourism Keyword & Webs …

Friday, June 19th, 2015

We're looking for digital marketers to do local language research for stem cell therapy and medical tourism related keywords in local language (Vietnamese) on local search engines such as Google.com.vn. The required deliverables for the project: 1. Top 30 search terms for Myanmar on local search engines in local language that is relevant to the local culture towards medical tourism for treatments that is related to stem cell therapy and anti-aging. (Please provide the English translation of the keywords) 2. Based on the top 30 search terms and any other means, research for the top treatment destinations outside of Myanmar for stem cell therapy and related treatments. Please provide between 3-5 top destinations with short description why these are the selected top destinations. 3. Also based on the top 30 search terms, please provide the top websites that are acting as agents and/or related to providing outbound medical tourism services. Please provide at least 15 websites with a short description in English. 4. Deliver in PowerPoint (ppt) format with screenshots of the selected websites for number 2. References for basis of research: 1. Please refer to Clinique La Prairie for the types of medical services and stem cell therapy for the basis of the research. 2. Sample English keywords related to the type of services the project is about. Medical Tourism health tourism wellness tourism medical care abroad health and wellness tourism international health travel global health travel overseas healthcare healthcare tourism Regenerative Medicine rejuvenation therapy rejuvenation procedure medical rejuvenation medical rejuvenation centre regenerative clinics regenerative therapy service regenerative health care preventive medicine predictive medicine longevity medicine therapeutic medicine Stem Cell stem cell therapy stem cell treatment stem cell transplant stem cell for cancer stem cell for diabetes stem cell for arthritis cell therapy clinics stem cell procedure stem cell banking cultured stem cells stem cell injections stem cell osteoarthritis stem cell for back pain Turn around due date for all deliverables: 24 June 2015

We're looking for digital marketers to do local language research for stem cell therapy and medical tourism related keywords in local language (Vietnamese) on local search engines such as Google.com.vn. The required deliverables for the project: 1. Top 30 search terms for Vietnam on local search engines in local language that is relevant to the local culture towards medical tourism for treatments that is related to stem cell therapy and anti-aging. (Please provide the English translation of the keywords) 2. Based on the top 30 search terms and any other means, research for the top treatment destinations outside of Vietnam for stem cell therapy and related treatments. Please provide between 3-5 top destinations with short description why these are the selected top destinations. 3. Also based on the top 30 search terms, please provide the top websites that are acting as agents and/or related to providing outbound medical tourism services. Please provide at least 15 websites with ...

Jun 17, 2015

Visit link:
Vietnam Stem Cell Medical Tourism Keyword & Webs ...

Read More...

Stem Cell Tourism | The Embryo Project Encyclopedia

Thursday, June 4th, 2015

When James Thomson of the University of Wisconsin announced in 1998 that he had derived and cultured human embryonic stem cells (hESCs), Americans widely believedand acceptedthat stem cells would one day be the basis of a multitude of regenerative medical techniques. Researchers promised that they would soon be able to cure a variety of diseases and injuries such as cancer, diabetes, Parkinsons, spinal cord injuries, severe burns, and many others. But it wasnt until January 2009 that the Food and Drug Administration approved the first human clinical trials using hESCs. The trials were put on hold in August of 2009 before they were ever begun. After more than a decade of being promised curative stem cell therapy, many people have been unwilling to wait for American doctors to provide stem cell treatments. Some people have opted not to wait or rely on other treatments, and have chosen to receive stem cell therapy from international institutions. This phenomenon has been dubbed stem cell tourism, and it has garnered much media attention, both in support and in opposition.

A number of countries offer stem cell therapies, including Panama, Mexico, China, and the Ukraine. EmCell, a medical center in the Ukraine founded in 1994, claims to have begun treating types 1 and 2 diabetes mellitus with hESCs in 1992. The company applied for and was granted patents for treatment of AIDS and multiple sclerosis (MS) in the 1990s, and it began working on treatments for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis and muscular dystrophies before 2000. EmCell has since begun to offer treatments for ALS, cancer, liver diseases, hypertension, and Parkinsons. Treatments at EmCell involve administering stem cells intravenously or subcutaneously, after which the cells are said to migrate to the correct site, engraft and multiply, and eventually undergo correct specialization, or differentiation. Once properly differentiated, the cell growth is expected to replace damaged tissues and restore impaired functions. EmCell treatments are entirely outpatient and are reported to be effective within one to two months.

The biggest concern with stem cell therapies, and the reason why the FDA halted human trials, is that undifferentiated, or pluripotent, stem cells can be influenced to differentiate by a number of factors (including growth factors, growth matrices or media, and physical forces). Under certain (as yet unknown) conditions, hESCs can form tumors or teratomas, a type of tumor composed of tissue derived from all three germ layers. As of 2009, no American research was able to ensure that tumors would never form when hESCs were injected into damaged tissues, or even that the cells would differentiate into healthy cells of the correct type. EmCell, however, claims that teratomas only form when hESCs are one to two weeks old, and that its cells, injected when they are four to eight weeks old, are differentiated enough that they are incapable of uncontrollable growth that can lead to tumor formation. Presently, EmCell claims that its therapies have produced no negative side effects. Despite these claims, however, the EmCell website does not provide any conclusive success stories or patient interviews.

Mexico has a stem cell clinic as well, the Cancun Stem Cell Clinic (CSCC). The clinic conducts stem cell treatments as well as phase I, II, and III clinical studies, and encourages clinicians to perform studies at the clinic. The CSCC offers one-day and one-week self-donor (autologous) bone marrow transplants, whereby bone marrow is taken from a patients leg, mixed with growth factors, and re-circulated through the patients body. Women who have had a cesarean section can opt to have their fresh placenta delivered to the CSCC, where clinicians remove portions of the amniotic membrane and mix it with a growth factor solution. The mixture is then intra-abdominally injected into the womans belly, to help the incision heal. For advanced disease treatment, the CSCC offers treatments that use umbilical cord stem cells, amniotic fluid stem cells, and embryonic live cell therapy. The companys website does not explain how its treatments are administered, nor is there any discussion of potential risks or negative side effects.

The International Society for Stem Cell Research believes that clinics such as EmCell and the Cancun Stem Cell Clinic are exploiting patients hopes, since the treatments are costly (over $20,000) and unproven. The society established a task force of doctors, researchers, ethicists, and regulatory officials from thirteen countries to establish guidelines for stem cell therapy, hoping to target clinics that might take advantage of patients by using experimental procedures without transparency, patient protections, or proper oversight. Experts cautiously estimate that the number of people who have opted for these procedures is in the thousands.

Critiques of the EmCell clinic are representative of the myriad problems that Western scientists have with stem cell tourism. EmCell has been criticized for its treatment methods and for the lack of conclusive evidence that the treatments are working as advertised. Some researchers question why there are subcutaneous injections of stem cells for treatment of disorders like motor-neuron disease, since it would be difficult for the cells to reach the appropriate tissues. Once injected, the stem cells often die because they are in a foreign environment, and are receiving a number of cues that may cause them to differentiate incorrectly. The leading scientist at EmCell, who devised the procedure and administers the treatments, is Alexander Ivanovich Smikodub. Smikodub has published no studies proving the effectiveness of his treatments, nor has he conducted any placebo studies to confirm that the effects of his procedures are really the result of the application of embryonic stem cells. This has led a number of Western scientists and clinicians to be highly skeptical of EmCell and Smikodubs claims that their treatments cure anything at all. Smikodub, however, claims that he doesnt want to waste his time publishing papers in Western journals; he believes his real purpose is to administer treatments and cure sick patients. He has also refused to allow other scientists to investigate his clinic and perform studies of their own, eliciting further rebuke and suspicion of Smikodubs work. In a BBC news story on EmCell, one scientist explains his fears that in the years to come, as people start to realize that treatments from clinics such as EmCell are not effective and provide no cures, that there will be a backlash against stem cell research, turning people against more traditional research that may someday provide more reliable results.

Excerpt from:
Stem Cell Tourism | The Embryo Project Encyclopedia

Read More...

What is stem cell tourism? Narrated by Professor Timothy …

Monday, June 1st, 2015

Scientific discoveries can lead to great enthusiasm about their potential medical benefits. A danger is that this enthusiasm may lead to hype and exaggerated claims of near-term benefits. In the realm of stem cell research, excitement about the benefits of this field have led to a variety of clinics opening around the world that offer therapies that are not yet proven to be safe or effective. When patients travel nationally or internationally to obtain unproven stem cell therapies it is known as "stem cell tourism". This video aims to explain this term in a brief and concise format.

If you are considering obtaining a cellular therapy, please consult the resources below to find our more information regarding the potential risks.

FURTHER INFORMATION: Stem Cell Network: Stem cell hype and the dangers of stem cell tourism - stemcellnetwork.ca/index.php?page=stem-cell-hype-and-the-dangers-of-stem-cell-tourism International Society for Stem Cell Research's "A Closer Look at Stem Cells" - closerlookatstemcells.org/

SCRIPT: In the past 50 years, stem cell research has led to some groundbreaking therapies including bone marrow transplantation and skin grafting. Today, stem cell research continues to hold the promise of new treatments for many diseases.

However most of these potential treatments are still experimental.

Any experimental therapy must first be carefully tested to make sure it is both safe and effective before it is approved for patients.

This testing process normally takes several years during which time many experimental treatments may fail because they are unsafe, ineffective or both.

Despite this, clinics throughout the world offer untested and potentially dangerous stem-cell-based treatments, usually at a high cost to the patient. As a result, these locations have become a destination for stem cell tourism - where hopeful patients travel internationally to seek unapproved stem cell therapies.

Before patients spend time and money, they should familiarize themselves with the facts and think twice about obtaining expensive treatments that have not yet been proven safe or effective.

CREDITS Narration by: Professor Timothy Caulfield Written & Directed by: Ben Paylor & Mike Long Produced by: Infoshots - infoshots.ca Animation by: David Murawsky - davidmurawsky.com/ Sound by: James Wallace - imdb.com/name/nm0908691/ Funding by: Stem Cell Network and Canadian Stem Cell Foundation

More:
What is stem cell tourism? Narrated by Professor Timothy ...

Read More...

stem cell tourism | Bioethics.net

Monday, June 1st, 2015

December 21, 2014 A Role for Clinical Ethics Consultants in Stem Cell Tourism Recently Dr. Christopher Thomas Scott of Stanford University wrote a great paper titled The Case of Stem Cell Counselors inStem Cell Reportswhich draws parallels from the field of genetic counseling arguing for the need for stem cell counsellors (1). Scott outlines that due to increases in the number of stem cell trials combined with fraudulent therapies being offered around the world, the time is ripe for having counsellors help patients navigate the clinical stem cell research/therapy landscape. These experts can help patients identify and distinguish legitimate trials from unproven interventions, explain the risks, benefits and therapeutic options, and serve as a resource to provide them with educational information. On a related topic, my colleagues and I at AMBI were going to write a paper arguing that clinical ethics consultants should be involved in countering the impact of stem cell tourism and serve as a resource for patients who are contemplating undertaking an unproven stem cell based intervention (SCBI). We thought that clinical ethics consultants are in a unique position to offer advice and counselling to patients seeking unproven SCBIs for a few reasons. The Alden March Bioethics Institute offers a Master of Science in Bioethics, a Doctorate of Professional Studies in Bioethics, and Graduate Certificates in Clinical Ethics and Clinical Ethics Consultation. For more information on AMBI's online graduate programs, please visit ourwebsite. November 23, 2014 Deregulation and Free Markets for Stem Cell Products Paolo Bianco and colleague Douglas Sipp wrote a very provocative and interesting piece recently published in the journalNature(http://www.nature.com/news/regulation-sell-help-not-hope-1.15409)discussing a movement to permit stem cell medicines, among others, to be sold in the market without the requirement to show much safety and efficacy data permitting the market to determine safety and effectiveness of compounds. Here, patients would basically pay to obtain products and also be research subjects. Certain powerful groups are calling for the deregulation of clinical medicine as a business model to bring innovative products to the marketplace. But before I begin explaining what Bianco and Sipp discuss, we need to cover the current system of regulatory oversight of medical products. The Alden March Bioethics Institute offers a Master of Science in Bioethics, a Doctorate of Professional Studies in Bioethics, and Graduate Certificates in Clinical Ethics and Clinical Ethics Consultation. For more information on AMBI's online graduate programs, please visit ourwebsite. September 23, 2014 Stem Cell Tourism and Patient Education What is the role of public education and stem cell tourism? What type of education is available to patients, caregivers and the public? Can public education actually change peoples minds such that they wont undergo an unproven stem cell-based intervention (SCBI)? These are the questions I will discuss here. But first, lets just give a brief description of stem cell tourism and outline some of the proposals discussed to stop this industry. The Stem Cell Tourism Industry and Ways to Curtail the Market Briefly, stem cell tourism is a term used to describe an Internet-based, direct-to-consumer advertised industry where patients receive unproven SCBIs for a range of diseases and injuries. Many clinics offering unproven SCBIs are in countries with lax regulations and enforcement. However, these clinics are also increasingly popping up in highly regulated countries like the U.S., U.K. and Australia. The term stem cell tourism is misleading because patients may not necessarily need to travel a great distance to receive such interventions, and focuses on patient behaviors instead of others involved in this market including regulatory agencies and the providers offering them. Moreover, there are some real risks to stem cell tourism. Beyond patients being financially exploited, there are several reports of tumors, lesions, tremors, other problems, and even deaths of individuals receiving unproven SCBIs. And there seems to be a stem cell treatment for just about every disease and injury, no matter how severe or benign if the patient can pay anywhere from $8,000-$30,000. Clinics advertise for serious conditions such as heart disease, stroke, MS, Parkinsons disease, ALS, and spinal cord injury among many others. You might have also heard of major NFL stars receiving SCBIs for sports injuries, movie stars receiving anti-aging stem cell treatments, and even a U.S. Governor receiving stem cells for chronic back pain. The fact that celebrities and public figures are receiving untested SCBIs is likely to make it seem that they are safe and effective and only bolsters the market. Yet there are very few bonafide stem cell treatments out there. While more clinical trials using stem cells are underway (1), it will become increasingly difficult for patients to discern between a legitimate clinical study and a fraudulent intervention. And because of all the hype, ethical issues, and misconduct scandals having to do with stem cell research, having patients become injured due to an unproven SCBI is not only bad itself of course, but also can seriously stifle the stem cell field. The Alden March Bioethics Institute offers a Master of Science in Bioethics, a Doctorate of Professional Studies in Bioethics, and Graduate Certificates in Clinical Ethics and Clinical Ethics Consultation. For more information on AMBI's online graduate programs, please visit ourwebsite. March 30, 2014 Stem Cell Tourism & Education I have written on this blog about the topic of stem cell tourism and the different strategies that have been proposed to stop the phenomenon. Just to provide a background on the topic from a previous blog: stemcell tourism is used to describe an internet-based direct-to-consumer advertised industry where clinics offer untested and unproven stem cell interventions as bonafide therapies to patients with a range of diseases and injuries including Parkinsons disease, multiple sclerosis, ALS, blindness, cancer, cerebral palsy, spinal cord injury and many others. Basically there is no scientific evidence of safety of efficacy of these modalities to offer them on a for-profit basis to patients. The term was originally coined as a form of tourism because patients traveled from countries like the U.S., U.K., Canada and Australia to clinics in countries with lax regulations, but this simply is not the case anymore. There are several clinics within highly regulated countries like U.S. that offer stem cell interventions. Of the several strategies people have discussed, one of the first has been on the topic of providing education to patients and the public. Here, people argue that providing education on the dangers of stem cell tourism might actually sway patients to not undertake unproven stem cell interventions. As some scholars have mentioned, education might not be as effective because it depends on a rationale actor model where we assume that patients will behave rationally and make choices based on weighing the harms and benefits of seeking unproven treatments. More so, such an argument does not sufficiently consider the hope patients have to ameliorate their disease, reduce pain or other symptoms, and increase their quality of life. While these counterarguments are certain rational and likely to be true, there is yet no solid evidence showing whether education on stem cell tourism is effective at swaying people from traveling for unproven interventions. But even if before we go into whether education might influence a patients decision to travel for unproven stem cell treatments, I think we need to assess the role of patient education in medicine. The Alden March Bioethics Institute offers a Master of Science in Bioethics, a Doctorate of Professional Studies in Bioethics, and Graduate Certificates in Clinical Ethics and Clinical Ethics Consultation. For more information on AMBI's online graduate programs, please visit ourwebsite.

Follow this link:
stem cell tourism | Bioethics.net

Read More...

Stem cell tourism growing trend | Harvard Gazette

Monday, June 1st, 2015

Internet sites offer help for people suffering from a dizzying array of serious conditions, including: Alzheimers, Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, atherosclerosis, autism, brain damage, cancer, cerebellar ataxia, cerebral palsy, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, Crohns, diabetes, diseases of the eye, genetic disorders, Huntingtons, kidney disease, lupus, muscular sclerosis, muscular dystrophy, Parkinsons, rheumatoid arthritis, spinal cord injury, spinal muscular atrophy, stroke, and Tay-Sachs disease.

There are clinics all around the world but especially in China, India, the Caribbean, Latin America, and nations of the former Soviet Union that will provide stem cell treatments for those long-intractable conditions. Never mind that cancer is the only disease category on that list for which there is published, scientifically valid evidence showing that stem cell therapy may help. Thousands, if not tens of thousands, of desperate people are flocking to clinics that charge tens of thousands of dollars for every unproven treatment.

That stem cell tourism was the subject of a panel discussion titled Stem Cell Therapy and Medical Tourism: Of Promise and Peril? presented Wednesday by the Harvard Stem Cell Institute (HSCI) and the Petrie-Flom Center for Health Law Policy, Biotechnology, and Bioethics.

Brock Reeve, HSCI executive director, introduced the topic by pointing out to those attending the session in Harvard Law Schools Austin Hall that there is medical tourism, and then there is medical tourism. After all, Reeve noted, patients flock from all over the world to the Harvard-affiliated Massachusetts General Hospital, Brigham and Womens Hospital, Dana-Farber Center Institute, and other Boston research hospitals for cutting-edge, scientifically validated treatments for a host of diseases.

But then there is the other kind of medical tourism, and every member of the panel agreed with speaker Timothy A. Caulfield, the Canada Research chair in health, law, and policy at the University of Alberta, when he said that the stem cell tourism phenomenon hurts the legitimacy of the entire field of stem cell science and medicine.

The stem cell tourism phenomenon hurts the legitimacy of the entire field of stem cell science and medicine, noted Timothy A. Caulfield of the University of Alberta.

While adult stem cells have been used for decades to treat a number of malignancies bone marrow transplants are, in fact, blood stem cell transplants those treatments, said George Q. Daley, the Samuel E. Lux IV Professor of Hematology/Oncology and director of the Stem Cell Transplantation Program at Childrens Hospital Boston and Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, are the only stem cell treatments that are not experimental.

Daley, a member of the Harvard Stem Cell Institutes executive committee and past president of the International Society for Stem Cell Research, added that we are seeing a growing number of legitimate clinical trials, but all such uses are experimental and there is great skepticism as to whether we have the scientific knowledge and basis even to predict that these will be effective. It may, he said, take decades before there is certainty.

But the overseas clinics selling stem cell therapy for a sweeping catalog of diseases arent offering patients places in clinical trials. They are touting what they claim are established treatments, with proven results. Caulfield and his colleagues in Alberta have conducted a number of studies on what is being offered at the overseas clinics, what claims are being made, who is seeking the treatments, and why. He said that the treatments are offered as safe, routine, and effective, but none of what is being offered matched what the scientific literature said. He accused the clinics of financial exploitation of desperate people, and said those who raise money to finance pilgrimages to them are raising money to turn over to a fraud.

While adult stem cells have been used for decades to treat a number of malignancies bone marrow transplants are, in fact, blood stem cell transplants those treatments, said Professor George Q. Daley, are the only stem cell treatments that are not experimental.

Here is the original post:
Stem cell tourism growing trend | Harvard Gazette

Read More...

Stem Cell Therapy in India | Stem Cell Treatment in India …

Friday, May 29th, 2015

"Stem Cell Cure Pvt. Ltd." is one of the most trusted and highlighted company in India which has expertise in providing best Stem Cell Services (for Blood disorders) in top most hospital of India for all major degenerative diseases. We provide our services through some medical devices such as bone marrow aspiration concentrate (BMAC) kit, platelet rich plasma (PRP) kit, stem cell banking and stem cells services (isolated from bone marrow, placenta and adipose) for research/clinical trial purpose only.

It is the single channel that has comprehensive stem cell treatment protocols and employs stem cells in different form as per the requirement of best suite on the basis of degenerative disease application. Stem cell therapy is helpful to treat many blood disorder such as thalassemia, sickle cell anemia, leukemia, aplastic anemia and other organ related disorder such as muscular dystrophy, spinal cord Injury, diabetes, chronic kidney disease (CKD), cerebral palsy, autism, optic nerve atrophy, retinitis pigmentosa, lung (COPD) disease and liver cirrhosis and our list of services doesn't end here.

"Stem Cell Cure" company is working with some India's top stem cell therapy centers, cord blood stem cell preservation banks and approved stem cell research labs to explore and share their unique stem cell solutions with our best services via coordinating of our clinician and researcher and solving every type of patient queries regarding stem cell therapy.

Our company is providing best stem cell therapy for the needed patients in all those application which can treat by stem cell therapy. We have stem cells in different forms to make the better recovery of patient and refer the best stem cell solutions after the evaluation of patient case study by our experts. Our experts in this field work together with patients though the collaborative patient experience to give you greater peace of mind to develop clear evidence based path. We have highly experts in our team and our experts are strong in research and clinical research from both points of view.

Our mission is to provide best stem cell therapy at reasonable price not only in India but also throughout the whole world so that every needed patients can get best stem cell therapy to improve his life.

Continue reading here:
Stem Cell Therapy in India | Stem Cell Treatment in India ...

Read More...

About Banking Stem Cells

Tuesday, May 19th, 2015

About Banking Stem Cells Banking Stem Cells Mission Statement

This web site is a practical guide for those considering saving stem cells through a stem cell banking service. Furthermore, while it is advisable to become active in the learning and decision making process regarding your own health care, none of the information discussed within this site is recommended and should not be acted upon without the advice of a your primary care physician or other licensed health care provider.

A stem cell is much like an artists blank canvas that has yet to be created. Stem cells have no programming which means they are undifferentiated and can develop and divide into other cells. This leaves endless possibilities for medical treatment. Since stem cells can be harvested from certain parts of the body, such as cord blood stem cells, there is a need for storing or banking stem cells.

Banking stem cells is a process where harvested stem cells are stored in a controlled environment and used later for medical treatment. One of the big draws of stem cell banking is the potential of stem cell therapy. Stem cell therapy is currently in the early stages of development and the future of medical treatment hangs in the balance.

One of the most common types of stem cell banking is banking cord blood. Expecting parents are often presented with the option of banking stem cells from cord blood and will have questions and concerns about the process. Cord blood is rich with stem cells and can be harvested without danger to mother or baby if done correctly.

Have a question or suggestion? Please leave a comment or contact us directly and we will respond to your query.

Read the rest here:
About Banking Stem Cells

Read More...

Curbing stem cell tourism in South Africa – ScienceDirect

Tuesday, May 19th, 2015

Highlights

Stem cells have great therapeutic potential.

Vulnerable patients are exploited by clinics offering unproven therapies.

South Africa is vulnerable due to the lack of and inability to enforce legislation.

Ethical/moral and cultural issues need to be considered with new scientific concepts.

Strategies need to be implemented to overcome the stem cell tourism threat.

Stem cells have received much attention globally due in part to the immense therapeutic potential they harbor. Unfortunately, malpractice and exploitation (financial and emotional) of vulnerable patients have also drawn attention to this field as a result of the detrimental consequences experienced by some individuals that have undergone unproven stem cell therapies. South Africa has had limited exposure to stem cells and their applications and, while any exploitation is detrimental to the field of stem cells, South Africa is particularly vulnerable in this regard. The current absence of adequate legislation and the inability to enforce existing legislation, coupled to the sea of misinformation available on the Internet could lead to an increase in illegitimate stem cell practices in South Africa. Circumstances are already precarious because of a lack of understanding of concepts involved in stem cell applications. What is more, credible and easily accessible information is not available to the public. This in turn cultivates fears born out of existing superstitions, cultural beliefs, rituals and practices. Certain cultural or religious concerns could potentially hinder the effective application of stem cell therapies in South Africa and novel ways of addressing these concerns are necessary. Understanding how scientific progress and its implementation will affect each individual and, consequently, the community, will be of cardinal importance to the success of the fields of stem cell therapy and regenerative medicine in South Africa. A failure to understand the ethical, cultural or moral ramifications when new scientific concepts are introduced could hinder the efficacy and speed of bringing discoveries to the patient. Neglecting proper procedure for establishing the field would lead to long delays in gaining public support in South Africa. Understanding the dangers of stem cell tourism where vulnerable patients are subjected to unproven stem cell therapies that have not undergone peer review or been registered with the relevant local authorities becomes imperative so that strategies to overcome this threat can be implemented.

Interest in the field of translational stem cell (SC) research has increased rapidly in the past decade, with exciting and promising research providing hope that cures for previously incurable diseases may well be attainable in the not too distant future. Much of the excitement originates from the ability of SCs to self-renew, replicate and to differentiate into any one of the more than 200 cell types in the body.

Although SC therapy may appear to be a relatively new phenomenon, bone marrow (BM) hematopoietic SCs (HSCs) have in fact been used routinely for more than 50years. SCs are grouped into three categories: embryonic SCs (harvested from a developing blastocyst/embryo produced by in vitro fertilization); adult SCs (harvested from various sources including BM, adipose tissue and umbilical cord blood (UCB)) and induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs differentiated cells that have been reverted back to a pluripotent-like state through genetic modification). The best understood are HSCs, which have been successfully applied around the world in BM transplantation for treatments of various conditions including malignant and non-malignant hematological disorders, immune deficiencies and certain genetic disorders. However, with new discoveries of different types of SCs and many potential novel applications, interest in regenerative and translational medicine has increased.

One consequence of this interest has been a dramatic rise globally in companies and clinics that sell stem-cell-related products or services. In addition to improvement in personal health and wellbeing, the increase seen in cellular and molecular medicine creates opportunities for entrepreneurship, business development and employment. South Africa has great potential for the development of translational medicine involving SC therapies (Jackson and Pepper, in press). In light of South Africa's current burden of disease and the potential for job creation, the country certainly stands to gain substantially (individually and as an economy) from these and similar developments. A major concern for the implementation and operation of such companies and clinics would be compliance with national and international regulatory standards with the supposed precondition that appropriate national legislation and governance exist.

Read the original post:
Curbing stem cell tourism in South Africa - ScienceDirect

Read More...

Stem Cell Key Terms | California’s Stem Cell Agency

Tuesday, May 19th, 2015

En Espaol

The term stem cell by itself can be misleading. In fact, there are many different types of stem cells, each with very different potential to treat disease.

Stem Cell Pluripotent Embryonic Stem Cell Adult Stem Cell iPS Cell Cancer Stem Cell

By definition, all stem cells:

Pluripotent means many "potentials". In other words, these cells have the potential of taking on many fates in the body, including all of the more than 200 different cell types. Embryonic stem cells are pluripotent, as are induced pluripotent stem (iPS) cells that are reprogrammed from adult tissues. When scientists talk about pluripotent stem cells they mostly mean either embryonic or iPS cells

Embryonic stem cells come from pluripotent cells, which exist only at the earliest stages of embryonic development. In humans, these cells no longer exist after about five days of development.

When isolated from the embryo and grown in a lab dish, pluripotent cells can continue dividing indefinitely. These cells are known as embryonic stem cells.

James Thomson, a professor of Anatomy at the University of Wisconsin, isolated the first human embryonic stem cells in 1998. He now shares a joint appointment at the University of California, Santa Barbara, a CIRM-funded institution.

What people commonly call adult stem cells are more accurately called tissue-specific stem cells. These are specialized cells found in tissues of adults, children and fetuses. They are thought to exist in most of the bodys tissues and organs.

Adult stem cells are committed to becoming a cell from their tissue of origin, but they still have the broad ability to become a subset of adult cell types. For example:

View post:
Stem Cell Key Terms | California's Stem Cell Agency

Read More...

Page 7«..6789..»


2024 © StemCell Therapy is proudly powered by WordPress
Entries (RSS) Comments (RSS) | Violinesth by Patrick