'Stem cell tourism' growing trend: Panel decries overseas clinics that provide treatments devoid of scientific validity

December 3, 2012 by B. Colen
Experts gathered at Harvard to discuss the growing trend of "stem cell tourism," which some believe diminishes the legitimacy of the scientific research being done. I. Glenn Cohen, an assistant professor at Harvard Law School, suggested that one way to slow stem cell tourism could be to prosecute for child abuse when the treatment involves minors. Credit: Scott Eisen/Harvard Staff Photographer

Internet sites offer help for people suffering from a dizzying array of serious conditions, including: Alzheimer's, Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, atherosclerosis, autism, brain damage, cancer, cerebellar ataxia, cerebral palsy, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, Crohn's, diabetes, diseases of the eye, genetic disorders, Huntington's, kidney disease, lupus, muscular sclerosis, muscular dystrophy, Parkinson's, 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 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 School's 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 Women's 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 , 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.

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 Children's 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 Institute's 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 aren't 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."

I. Glenn Cohen, an assistant 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. "This falls under existing child-abuse and neglect statutes," Cohen said.

"I am sympathetic to parents" who believe they are helping their children, he said, suggesting that pediatricians in the United States should first try to convince parents to agree to the use of proven therapies, next try to dissuade them from using unproven therapies, then threaten to report them to the authorities, and, when all else fails, report them.

One member of the panel was at a far remove from stem cell research, patient treatment, and science.

So it came as little surprise that Jill Lepore, David Woods Kemper '41 Professor of American History and chair of Harvard's History and Literature Program, came at the issues from a very different perspective. "I don't have patients," Lepore said, "I have characters." She then proceeded to tell the story of Robert Ettinger, who for decades ran the Cryonics Institute outside Detroit, which offered its clients the hope of eternal life by freezing their brains after death until some future time when the condition that claimed their lives could be cured.

Lepore pointed out that the institute recently was reclassified a "cemetery" by the state of Michigan. 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."

Explore further: Nature reports on unapproved stem-cell therapies in China

Related Stories

Nature reports on unapproved stem-cell therapies in China

April 12, 2012
(Phys.org) -- A report in the journal Nature on the extent of unapproved stem-cell treatments in China has found that the practice is still widespread and is attracting thousands of medical tourists to the country.

Recommended for you

Exploring the potential of human echolocation

June 25, 2017
People who are visually impaired will often use a cane to feel out their surroundings. With training and practice, people can learn to use the pitch, loudness and timbre of echoes from the cane or other sounds to navigate ...

Team eradicates hepatitis C in 10 patients following lifesaving transplants from infected donors

April 30, 2017
Ten patients at Penn Medicine have been cured of the Hepatitis C virus (HCV) following lifesaving kidney transplants from deceased donors who were infected with the disease. The findings point to new strategies for increasing ...

'bench to bedside to bench': Scientists call for closer basic-clinical collaborations

March 24, 2017
In the era of genome sequencing, it's time to update the old "bench-to-bedside" shorthand for how basic research discoveries inform clinical practice, researchers from The Jackson Laboratory (JAX), National Human Genome Research ...

The ethics of tracking athletes' biometric data

January 18, 2017
(Medical Xpress)—Whether it is a FitBit or a heart rate monitor, biometric technologies have become household devices. Professional sports leagues use some of the most technologically advanced biodata tracking systems to ...

Financial ties between researchers and drug industry linked to positive trial results

January 18, 2017
Financial ties between researchers and companies that make the drugs they are studying are independently associated with positive trial results, suggesting bias in the evidence base, concludes a study published by The BMJ ...

Best of Last Year – The top Medical Xpress articles of 2016

December 23, 2016
(Medical Xpress)—It was a big year for research involving overall health issues, starting with a team led by researchers at the UNC School of Medicine and the National Institutes of Health who unearthed more evidence that ...

1 comment

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

1 / 5 (2) Dec 03, 2012
Which is the better option of choice?
a) Gambling with hope, with the potential of getting treated or cured for a condition that is causing great grief and distress,
or b) Waiting several decades, suffering with the condition (possibly even dying), just so they can announce after 50 years that they've finally begun clinical trials.

The slow pace, at which, stem cell therapy is moving in the Western world (in spite of the potential) is utter bullshit.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.