RESUMO
In this article I explore how experimental stem cell treatments have become a therapeutic choice in India. Drawing on ethnographic fieldwork, I illustrate six sociotechnical pathways by which clinically unproven treatment is rendered regular health care practice for consumers and providers across the country. Through each pathway, based on the themes of bioconsumption, integration, consumer contacts, treatment experience and rituals, and political culture, I demonstrate how the experimental status of stem cell treatment is undermined and thereby experienced by key stakeholders as just another medical option. In analyzing the pathways, I argue that unproven stem cell treatment practices are promoted and sustained by multiple social, political and technical forces. The discussion on pathways is therefore situated within a conceptual framework of "normalization," derived from studies that investigate the multidimensional aspects to controversial and/or new medical technologies becoming routine.
Assuntos
Transplante de Células-Tronco , Antropologia Médica , Tecnologia Biomédica , Atenção à Saúde/ética , Atenção à Saúde/etnologia , Humanos , Índia/etnologia , Pesquisa com Células-Tronco , Transplante de Células-Tronco/ética , Transplante de Células-Tronco/etnologia , Transplante de Células-Tronco/legislação & jurisprudênciaRESUMO
Protecting the safety and welfare of clinical trial subjects is the primary responsibility of the multidisciplinary ethics committee. In India, ethics committees have come under increasing criticism for functioning as "secret societies unaccountable to the public" (1). Yet, little effort has been made to undertake qualitative research on the ethics review bodies. This article describes the essential findings of a study that aimed at providing an insight into the structure and functioning of institutional ethics committees (IECs) in selected hospitals in Delhi. Importantly, the study also attempted to investigate the challenges faced by IEC members that pose barriers to IEC performance and thus jeopardise a just and effective system of protection for the human trial subject.