Abstract

In recent years, there has been a rapid growth in the use of autologous stem cell-based interventions to treat a wide range of medical conditions, including those for which there is limited evidence of safety and efficacy. One justification for this growth in the use of unproven interventions is that clinicians should be free to innovate, as long as consumers are adequately informed about risks and benefits. In this essay, we systematically refute the strong claim that consumer and clinician autonomy provide sufficient justification for clinical innovation with autologous stem cells. While we do not deny the importance of consumer and clinician autonomy, we argue that equal consideration needs to be given...