Lung transplant vs stem cell treatment

[JR]

Can anyone explain to me why stem cell treatment is any different than any other new experimental type treatment? What is the purpose of all the regulations vs letting someone go under the knife for instance to get a lung transplant?
My dad is over the limit to qualify for a transplant anyway. I'm just wondering when it became okay to have the government telling doctors how to care for people. Has this happened with any other medical procedure?

 

[barbara]

I'm not aware of it happening with any other treatment. It's pretty much unprecedented as far as I'm aware.

I believe it's because of the potential market value of off the shelf stem cell products. This isn't something that is possible with other medical treatments such as surgeries.

Consider that a lung transplant is not something that can be mass produced, so doctors are considered competent enough to perform that type of surgery. If a lung transplant could be patented however and replacement lungs mass produced in some way, then I am sure that would create a roar from the scientific community, Big Pharma and regulatory agencies. They would deem doctors unable to perform lung transplants claiming patients were being put at risk. Decades of studying how to perfect the surgery, followed by extensive clinical trials would be required. The process would be patented of course driving up the cost several times more than if the transplant had been performed by a medical doctor as the practice of medicine.

As I've said before, it's all about the money.

 

[Jeannine]

JR - You make several excellent points. I'm afraid our healthcare system is going the way of Europe where doctors have no say about treatment. In Europe, the community matrons and local boards determine your fate based on the amount of money they have in their budget for your particular illness, your age, state of health, etc.