The Texas Legislature is considering three risky bills that would give free rein to stem cell clinics to profit big time off of patients by selling unproven and unapproved “stem cell treatments” that have little if any science behind them. I call one of these bills “Right to Profit” for clinics, which if these became law could get millions from vulnerable patients and potentially block patient rights.
Some of these bills including HB 810 reportedly got a boost from emotional, teary-eyed testimony from Texas Representative Drew Springer (photo from Texas State Directory), who talked about his wife being paralyzed and how stem cells via these bills would help her. From the Dallas News:
“Maybe my wife will walk,” said Springer, whose wife is Lydia paralyzed from the waist down from a diving accident. The next bill on the calendar would affect experimental stem-cell treatments.
“I’ll be damned if we don’t have a chance tonight that would open the doors to science,” he said.
In large numbers, Republicans flanked Springer at the front of the chamber. The GOP rebels relented, letting the stem-cell bill win tentative approval.”
I wish all the best to Springer and his wife. Unfortunately, these bills have little to do with actual stem cell science.
The bills aren’t fully passed by the Texas House yet as they at least must get through another vote and then even if they survive there, they have to get through the Texas Senate, but unfortunately this is a move forward for the bills.
14 thoughts on “Risky Pro-Stem Cell Clinic Bills Still Alive in Texas Legislature”
Once again Greed trumps Science in the United States. What else is new?
Fallout will enable false hope for sale and exploitation of patients primarily. This has nothing to do with finding cures or really helping patients. Not enough supervision over the field to protect patients. Unless clinicians are versed in immunology and stem cell biology and can talk the language, we recommend patients stay away from any clinic offering ‘stem cell treatments’. In most cases, trust your orthopedic surgeon for the straight dope on signaling cells.
“By injecting a controlled amount of adult stem cells…”
“We harvest the bone marrow stem cells (called BMAC) from the anterior iliac crest at the thick portion called the gluteal pillar”
“The stem cells that we harvest from you are called mesenchymal stem cells”
In light of these statements on your website, perhaps you can tell us how you control for the number of MSCs each patient receives? How many MSCs does each patient get? Is there a set number or must each patient’s MSC count fall into an acceptable range? Is each BMAC sample tested to verify stem cell counts, viability. etc?
@admin – What do you think about this particular claim (with no citation), “Stem cell treatments have been shown to be especially effective in dealing with the inflammatory component of degenerative arthritis.” (Not just “effective” but “especially effective”)
At least Sen. Van Taylor and Sen. Schwertner added amendments that allow patients to sue physicians who cause adverse events. And, require physicians to be affiliated with an IRB at a academic medical center or hospital with at least 150 beds, along with reporting outcomes and data collection to the Texas Medical Board. Hopefully, these amendments will keep some of the charlatans from taking financial advantage of vulnerable patients. HB 3236, which would allow patients to pay for unproven drugs appears to be dead, unless the house tries to pull a fast one in the next couple of days. These safeguards at least protect patients and responsible research.
Bill, I don’t know why you’re having trouble with the concept that science is based in truth, not emotion or opinion. No amount of emotion or opinion will cure people, but science will, if it’s possible.
I guess I missed the point of science when I got my physics degree.
And no one in Texas cares what university professors and Big Pharma shills living in California, Minnesota, and New York think!
Well, apparently some do care. For instance, this blog has a very large number of readers from Texas including you, ‘Bill’ if I’m not mistaken.
What happened to my reply? “I meant ‘the Texas state legislature” was my reply. The point being that non-Texas residents don’t get a say.
The bill passed and will be law in Texas.
Here’s the picture of the entire Texas House of Represenatives Surrounding Representative Springer while he gave his moving testimony. https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10213141531271754&set=a.10201180373010273.1073741826.1198779302&type=3
Paul our bill passed the Texas House with 150 yes votes and zero no votes on its 3rd reading. We expect the same support with our 31 senators. This was a completely bipartisan bill with all members of the house coming together. Representative Springer wasn’t just surrounded by Republicans while he shared his moving testimony, every Democrat and Republican came together in a circle surrounding him with compassionate support. I’ll find the picture for you. This was grassroots advocacy at its strongest. This was democracy in motion. Patients asked for a solution, and our elected officials delivered!
Which bill are you referring to?
Why 3 separate bills?
How can patients for stem cells be in favor of 3236 when it seems designed just to take advantage of patients financially?
Oh yes, sorry I didn’t clarify. Our members testified in front of the Public Health Committee in favor of HB 810. We were not a part of testifying for the other 2 bills.
Rep. Springer’s emotional stem cell speech breaks tea party obstruction
Comments are closed.