stem cells
RFK Jr.'s FDA may embrace state-led deregulation of biologics
Under health secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the FDA appears poised to loosen its grip on stem cell oversight. Interestingly, this is because it’s aligned with red-state laws that permit the use of non-FDA-approved biologics. This could potentially empower dubious stem cell clinics, STAT’s Paul Knoepfler writes, which might endanger patients — and sideline science in favor of political ideology and profit.
Florida and Alabama are the latest states to say that FDA approval isn’t necessary for stem cells to be used clinically. Coupled with Kennedy’s ties with stem cell donors, the agency risks becoming a passive bystander as unproven therapies flood the market under the guise of access and innovation.
Read more.
ivf
Eight babies born using three-parent IVF technique
Eight children have been born healthy through mitochondrial replacement therapy in the U.K., the first large-scale clinical use of the controversial “three-parent baby” technique designed to prevent transmission of devastating mitochondrial diseases. In two papers published in the New England Journal of Medicine, researchers from Newcastle University reported that the children — now up to 2 years old — are meeting developmental milestones, though some showed low levels of inherited mutated mitochondrial DNA, a known limitation of the procedure.
“As parents, all we ever wanted was to give our child a healthy start in life,” said the mother of one of the babies born with the help of the technology, in a statement issued by Newcastle University. “Mitochondrial donation IVF made that possible. After years of uncertainty this treatment gave us hope — and then it gave us a baby.”
While long-term and even multigenerational follow-up is still needed, the results strengthen the case for expanding access to the technology in carefully selected patients.
Read more.
clinical trials
Rethinking ethics and equity in research pay
For decades, institutional review boards have erred on the side of conservatism when it comes to paying medical research trial participants — capping compensation out of fear of influencing them unethically. But this caution, well-intentioned though it may have been, has backfired, opines clinical trial advocate Jake Eberts of the nonprofit 1Day Sooner and University of North Carolina bioethicist Jill Fisher.
Instead, trials systematically underpay participants, which slows recruitment and disproportionately harms low-income individuals who depend on such studies to make ends meet. In a recent open letter, dozens of experts called this model misguided, pointing out there’s little evidence that higher pay clouds risk perception. If the research is ethical and the risks are reasonable, they argue, participants should be trusted — and fairly compensated.
Read more.