,
11 tweets,
3 min read
Read on Twitter
I've gone down the rabbit hole of "stem cell therapy" for autism... This is not a thing. But is treated by some scientists and medical researchers as if it might be... edition.cnn.com/2017/04/05/hea…
I'm aghast at the complete lack of a biological rationale for this approach. Why tf should injecting random ass stem cells into someone's spinal cord have any effect on symptoms of autism?
I haven't seen a rationale more sophisticated than: autism is a brain thing. stem cells can brain. stem cells?
What the hell are they supposed to do in there? We know pretty much NOTHING definitive about either the neurobiology of "autism" (likely heterogeneous) OR what happens to stem cells transplanted into the human brain.
What scientist or clinician could look at that state of ignorance and think - yep, stem cells - definitely worth a try... What happened to first, do no harm?
Of course, there is another rationale: stem cells sound sciencey and people will pay for them. parents of some autistic children are desperate, so: Stem cells! Cha-ching!
That any of this stuff ever gets ethical approval given the completely vague hypothesis is simply appalling. And that is matched by how badly the "trials" are conducted, though you wouldn't get that impression from this cheerleading review... ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/P…
Despite the title, there are no "insights". Just tiny "trials", with no placebo, no double-blinding, and all your favourite questionable research practices...
Meanwhile: Canada case highlights possible long-term risks of experimental stem cell therapy statnews.com/2019/07/11/can… via @statnews
@statnews And: Stem cell therapies: medical experts call for strict international rules theguardian.com/science/2017/j…
@statnews How 'stem cell' clinics became a Wild West for dodgy treatments newscientist.com/article/mg2373…
