The great divide between actual science and general publicperception—complicated by political controversy and ethical debate—has onlygrown deeper with every breakthrough or achievement in the quest to use stemcells to regenerate or repair damaged tissue, skin and organs. Worse yet, suchcontroversies have significantly slowed scientific and commercial progress, asnoted by our features editor, Randall C. Willis, in the second part of our serieson trends in stem cell research,
"Regenerating interest in stem cell medicine,"a feature report that begins on page 32 of this month's issue.
"When the idea of embryonic stem cells first came up aboutthree decades ago, conversations ran rampant about thepotential—pluripotential, if you will—of this technology to cure all humandisease and assist us with replacement organs and tissues as those in our agingbodies failed over time. Despite a few early achievements, however, the hypequickly trailed off to be replaced by disappointment and anxiety," Williswrites.
However, he also notes, "While not necessarily abandoning the desire tooutright replace damaged tissues—and perhaps, one day, organs via tissueengineering—stem cell companies have tamped down earlier rhetoric on being'the' solution for human disease."
That'll be the first step in normalizing public expectationsfor stem cell therapies. Then, conversations between companies, regulators andpayors must begin, with those of us entrusted with reporting on thesedevelopments doing so in a more responsible and approachable way.
Here's hoping that the scientific community uses the growing"stem cell skin care" market as an opportunity to educate the general publicabout the actual science and promise of stem cells. Until then, I guess I'lljust slather on some sunblock and embrace the next phase of my life, wrinklesand all.
