Governing stem cell therapy in India: regulatory vacuum or jurisdictional ambiguity?
Shashank S TiwariSujatha RamanPublished in: New genetics and society (2014)
Stem cell treatments are being offered in Indian clinics although preclinical evidence of their efficacy and safety is lacking. This is attributed to a governance vacuum created by the lack of legally binding research guidelines. By contrast, this paper highlights jurisdictional ambiguities arising from trying to regulate stem cell therapy under the auspices of research guidelines when treatments are offered in a private market disconnected from clinical trials. While statutory laws have been strengthened in 2014, prospects for their implementation remain weak, given embedded challenges of putting healthcare laws and professional codes into practice. Finally, attending to the capacities of consumer law and civil society activism to remedy the problem of unregulated treatments, the paper finds that the very definition of a governance vacuum needs to be reframed to clarify whose rights to health care are threatened by the proliferation of commercial treatments and individualized negligence-based remedies for grievances.
Keyphrases
- cell therapy
- healthcare
- stem cells
- health insurance
- primary care
- mesenchymal stem cells
- clinical trial
- magnetic resonance
- clinical practice
- health information
- signaling pathway
- transcription factor
- computed tomography
- public health
- randomized controlled trial
- quality improvement
- affordable care act
- bone marrow
- study protocol
- tertiary care