Duke Has Quietly Discontinued a Costly, Unproven Autism Treatment
By Anna Merlan,
Vice
| 04. 17. 2023
For several years, parents of autistic children have paid between $10,000 and $15,000 to have their children undergo unproven stem cell and cord blood treatments at Duke University, through what’s called an expanded access program, or EAP. That practice has attracted criticism from observers and ethicists in the stem cell field, who have asked why Duke was charging money for a service when its own clinical trials have not been very promising. In recent months, Duke has sent letters informing parents that this program is no longer available to autistic children—raising new questions about what those parents, who’d been led to believe the treatment might be a panacea for their kids, will do instead.
One of the more urgent questions is whether parents who can’t access the treatment though Duke will instead go to a for-profit partner with ties to the school. That would be Cryo-Cell International, which previously announced that it had entered into a licensing agreement with Duke allowing it to offer the same stem cell infusions in private, for-profit clinics the company has said it plans to...
Related Articles
By Priyanka Runwal, Chemical and Engineering News | 08.05.2024
Saritee Sanodiya, 26, has spent countless days wondering if she’ll ever live a “normal” life. Growing up, Sanodiya often missed school, frequenting the hospital for sudden, life-threatening drops in her hemoglobin levels and excruciating pain in her joints. High fever...
It’s been a busy couple of months in biopolitics, with developments in the US, UK, China, Japan, and implicitly on Mars. Time for a brief roundup.
• • •
Bioethics needs an update
The National Research Act is now 50 years old. It was signed into law on July 12, 1974, as a direct response to publicity about the 1932 “Tuskegee Study of Untreated Syphilis in the Negro Male.” The Hastings Bioethics Forum celebrated its anniversary with an...
Image courtesy National Human Genome Research Institute
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is supposed to encourage effective medical advances while also ensuring that patients and research subjects are protected. This dual mandate demands tricky judgment calls that are made more difficult by outside pressures of several kinds, political, judicial, and especially commercial. This April story at Bloomberg examines one deeply troubling pattern of regulatory capture:
Americans Are Paying Billions to Take Drugs That Don’t Work
Companies are increasingly...
By Sarah Kliff and Azeen Ghorayshi, The New York Times | 07.15.2024