Biased Journalism Category: ARTICLES THAT LACK VETTING OF SOURCES AND/OR OPPOSING VIEWPOINTS
Media item: In the Flesh: The Embedded Dangers of Untested Stem Cell Cosmetics
Publisheed by: Scientific American
Author: Ferris Jabr
Dec 27, 2012 the following letter was sent to Ferris Jabr, followed by a second request on Jan. 7, 2013. No response, so we are posting our comments here, and invite a reply from the author.
Our group, Patients For Stem Cells, represents patients who have been denied access to our own stem cells because the FDA has regulated our cells as drugs. We oppose this decision and believe it is a violation of our basic rights. Your article, “In the Flesh: The Embedded Dangers of Untested Stem Cell Cosmetics” relates the case of a woman treated at a clinic in Beverly Hills with adverse results, for which she can pursue the doctor if this indeed was malpractice. The article fails to mention that and wanders off course going so far as to state,”Beyond the considerable risks to consumers, unapproved stem cell treatments also threaten the progress of basic research and clinical trials needed to establish safe stem cell therapies for serious illnesses.”
So now, we have gone from a woman receiving a questionable cosmetic treatment to the treatment being an indicator that all stem cell treatments are risky. You also fail to vet the “experts” quoted in the article.
We know that you take your job seriously and that clinics do exist that exploit patients. Having said that, In the interests of good journalism, we know that you will undoubtedly be in favor of presenting opposing viewpoints and vetting those that you use as sources in your article. We would like a chance for a few of us to correspond with you. Thank you in advance for the opportunity.
Your response as well as this letter will be posted on our web-site, www.patientsforstemcells.com.
SammyJo Wilkinson, a member of Patients For Stem Cells