« Prev Next »
I'm getting distracted again...this time by a report about stem cell fraud on 60 Minutes. I'm not here to talk about the con itself; I'm more interested in why people even bother with it. 
To begin, the International Society for Stem Cell Research (ISSCR) published a New Year statement in Cell Stem Cell that essentially reaffirms its commitment to public education and outreach in the interest of stem cell research and public safety. This organization dedicates itself to communicating proven and sound information on stem cells to the general public. In other words, it is the anti-hype organization, and generally preaches caution when it comes to putting stem cell therapies into people.
They concern is totally justified. There are mortal risks involved if stem cells are administered too freely. If the cells were dead before transplantation, then there's a possibility that the debris can clog blood vessels and cause a stroke or heart attack. If they're not clogging anything, there's the chance for an immune response. If the cells are alive and undifferentiated, there's a high risk for tumor formation. And if they are relatively pure and differentiated, then they may secrete growth factors that affect local tissues, and the effects are unpredictable.
So, I don't have a problem with their message. What stood out to me in this statement is the implied assumption that people are simply ignorant of the risk of stem cell use. As if the public is more educated on the subject, then they will not be so eager to obtain such risky medicine, and perhaps fall prey to unscrupulous con men.
This was still rattling around in my head when I saw the 60 Minutes report on stem cell fraud that same evening. I came away thinking that both the ISSCR and the journalists were missing the point. Sure, unscrupulous con men are endangering lives by selling unproven and potentially dangerous (and live) remedy. But has anyone stopped to ask why there's a market for them? I may be naïve to think that people generally aren't that careless or stupid. The people who buy and perhaps use this stuff are probably doing it in good faith and with the best intentions. Especially if the purpose is to not just wait around to die, or to watch a loved go through a slow and irreversible decline.
On NPR's Science Friday, they reported on the Program in Placebo Studies and the Therapeutic Encounter and its director Ted Kaptchuk as he discussed the healing potential of placebos. I almost dismissed him as a quack, until he explained how the ritual of medicine, namely the fuss doctors make over their patients, can give comfort to patient which can translate to lowered anxiety and increased healing. Dr. Kaptchuk admits there is insufficient proof to say placebos produce any physiological benefits in patients. But I can relate to the idea that people need to be comforted in order to find the strength for dealing with hardship. If placebos can keep patients from falling into despair, then is that also a form of healing? I mean, there are plenty of psychoactive drugs and talk therapy specialists around, all of which are supposed to control depression in ailing patients. So, it may be argued that means to prevent wrist-slitting during chronic or terminal illnesses would be good for the patients.
I want to make clear that I'm not advocating wishful thinking. However, I do think we all need a certain level of mental numbness during hard times just to move forward, and keep the motivation to tackle problems. I wonder if the people buying cell products in the black market (or on the internet) really believe the worst that can happen is nothing. Surely, they would have enough sense to know cells are not like sugar pills. In a society that can be outraged by GMO foods, I doubt people really think that putting strange cells into bodies is harmless. More likely, they are in a situation where they have little enough to lose and so will take whatever comfort money can buy.
Photo credit: © oobbles (via Flickr)
