Researchers have an ethical responsibility to portray the state of stem cell therapies accurately in the press.

No abstract

The growing international market for unproven stem cell-based interventions advertised on a direct-to-consumer basis over the internet (“stem cell tourism”) is a source of concern because of the risks it presents to patients as well as their supporters, domestic health care systems, and the stem cell research field. Emerging responses such as public and health provider-focused education and national regulatory efforts are encouraging, but the market continues to grow. Physicians play a number of roles in the stem cell tourism market and, in many jurisdictions, are members of a regulated profession. In this article, we consider the use of professional regulation to address physician involvement in stem cell tourism. Although it is not without its limitations, professional regulation is a potentially valuable tool that can be employed in response to problematic types of physician involvement in the stem cell tourism market.

Non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) is an emerging technology for detecting chromosomal disorders in the fetus and mass media may have an impact on shaping the public understanding of its promise and challenges. We conducted a content analysis of 173 news reports to examine how NIPT was portrayed in English-language media sources between January 1 and December 31, 2013. Our analysis has shown that media emphasized the benefits and readiness of the technology, while overlooking uncertainty associated with its clinical use. Ethical concerns were rarely addressed in the news stories, which points to an important dimension missing in the media discourse. AbstractHealth communication; Representations of science and technology

The practice of travelling abroad to receive unproven and unregulated stem cell treatments has become an increasingly problematic global phenomenon known as 'stem cell tourism'. In this paper, we examine representations of nine major clinics and providers of such treatments on the microblogging network Twitter. We collected and conducted a content analysis of Twitter posts (n = 363) by these establishments and by other users mentioning them, focusing specifically on marketing claims about treatment procedures and outcomes, discussions of safety and efficacy of stem cell transplants, and specific representations of patients' experiences. Our analysis has shown that there were explicit claims or suggestions of benefits associated with unproven stem cell treatments in approximately one third of the tweets and that patients' experiences, whenever referenced, were presented as invariably positive and as testimonials about the efficacy of stem cell transplants. Furthermore, the results indicated that the tone of most tweets (60.2 %) was overwhelmingly positive and there were rarely critical discussions about significant health risks associated with unproven stem cell therapies. When placed in the context of past research on the problems associated with the marketing of unproven stem cell therapies, this analysis of representations on Twitter suggests that discussions in social media have also remained largely uncritical of the stem cell tourism phenomenon, with inaccurate representations of risks and benefits for patients.