Today was the first part of the FDA’s 2-day meeting on stem cell draft guidances. It was a great meeting I thought. A few consistent themes and notable things emerged as raised by participants.
Today an opinion piece that I wrote about CIRM was published in the San Francisco Chronicle. The unusual element here is that the article is critical of CIRM. More specifically I raised concerns about a recent political trend at CIRM under its new President Randy Mills lobbying for dramatically weaker stem cell regulatory oversight. The Chronicle piece was first posted online on Thursday on the paper’s website. I encourage you to read it when you get a chance. For a decade I have been one of the most consistent …Read More
I am often critical of for-profit stem cell clinics on this blog for numerous reasons. For instance, one thing that concerns me greatly about these clinics is that they charge patients to get experimental “treatments” that have not been proven to be safe or effective. But as some patients have pointed out to me over the years, certain FDA-approved stem cell clinical trials also charge patients to receive unproven stem cell therapies. Should someone (even if that someone is an academic clinical researcher) be able …Read More
The biggest debate today in the stem cell world is over how much regulation is needed for new, investigational stem cell therapies that are not as yet approved. Sometimes it feels very lonely being out there publicly advocating for appropriately thorough regulation of stem cell therapies and at times I get a lot of heat for that, especially from stem cell clinics. For instance, I am publicly opposed to the REGROW Act, a piece of legislation that would dangerously weaken oversight of experimental stem cell therapies. …Read More