Rigorous scientists stabilized a patient’s macular degeneration with a cutting-edge stem cell treatment; less rigorous scientists misapplied stem cell science and left three women blind.
In the world of real medicine, researchers are investigating promising stem cell treatments. In the world of not-so-real medicine, enthusiastic but unsupported claims abound. I recently wrote about a claim that the Santa Fe acupuncture protocol would reverse macular degeneration in four days. The notorious Natural News website claims that saffron cures macular degeneration. I wish! Bogus stem cell clinics in foreign countries encourage stem cell tourism and hundreds of clinics in the US offer their own untested versions of stem cell treatments. I recently wrote about a Pain Relief Center that offers stem cell treatments that may not even contain stem cells.
A recent issue of The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) contained five articles about stem cells: two Brief Reports, the first about a successful intervention, the other about interventions that left three women blind, an editorial about those two Brief Reports that called them “Polar Extremes,” an article in a series on Clinical Implications of Basic Research about reprogramming stem cells in vivo, and a Perspectives article from the FDA about “Clarifying Stem-Cell Therapy’s Benefits and Risks” that addresses regulatory issues…….
Read more: https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/stem-cells-for-macular-degeneration-meticulous-science-vs-unethical-carelessness/?fbclid=IwAR0yrWp0sS5x_Mumv3bg5tZ6PmPP4jtDPbNonygUNsQEf3dJ4GHWCNTpFT8
Source: Science-Based Medicine- Article belongs to them