Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Unfettered by regulation, India pulls ahead on stem cell treatments

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Unfettered by regulation, India pulls ahead on stem cell treatments

    A controversial New Delhi clinic deploys advanced therapies that are unavailable in the U.S. to cure Americans suffering from MS, diabetes, paralysis, Alzheimer's, Lyme disease and cerebral palsy.

    NEW DELHI, India — In December 2007, Californian Amy Scher got on a plane to India, wheeled herself into the Nu Tech Mediworld hospital in New Delhi, and started the first phase of an experimental embryonic stem-cell treatment.

    Her American doctor had warned her against this untested procedure. But 27-year-old Scher was making no progress with conventional medicine, and she was fed up with the constant visits to hospital emergency rooms.

    Scher suffered from chronic Lyme disease, which had gone undiagnosed initially, causing serious damage her nervous system. After researching her options for months, talking to several people who had benefitted from these treatments in India, and reading up about therapies available stateside, Scher decided the American medical system couldn't help her. She chose to travel to India.

    For eight weeks, she was injected with stem cells and underwent extensive physical therapy. The treatments cost an average of $20,000 to $30,000 for a first round of injections. They were not covered by insurance.

    Today, Scher's U.S. physician, Dr. Steven Harris considers her "asymptomatic." He is uncertain whether the disease has been eradicated, or if it’s just dormant, but he says the treatments appear to have helped.

    From India, Scher brought back a SPECT scan, which measures blood flow in the brain. Before India, Harris says, the blood flow in her brain was impaired. "At the end of her stay, a repeat scan showed normalization of her blood flow — in effect, an improvement in brain function." Scher no longer takes nerve stabilizers or cardiac medication. The chronic pain, a constant companion since 2001, is gone.

    The growth of private hospitals providing stem cell therapies, however, is breeding a rift of a different kind. Given that most of these treatments have not been proven safe or effective, medical professionals dispute whether these clinics should be allowed to exist at all.

    At the heart of the controversy is Dr. Geeta Shroff, the doctor who treated Scher.

    Being both fiercely independent and intelligent has earned Dr. Shroff the criticism and scorn of many. A pioneer in many ways, she developed a technology through which, by the use of a single donated embryo, she has been able to treat 600 patients for conditions such as Alzheimer's, multiple sclerosis, renal failure, cerebral palsy, and diabetes. What's also unique about Dr. Shroff's technique is that's she's been able to grow embryonic stem cells without the use of any animal products.

    In a static injury, such as a stroke or a spinal cord injury, the stem cells have to bypass the thick scar tissue and form connections around it. Patients who come seeking a "miracle cure," are often disappointed, she says. The stem cells need time to regenerate the body, and often take months or years depending on the injury.

    In the nine years that she's been treating patients using this technology, she says that not one has reported any side effects. For GlobalPost Passport, several of her patients were happy to lay out their medical reports, wiggle their toes where they once had no feeling, and share details of their stay in the hospital — including complaints about the food. The scientific community, however, remains unconvinced.
    SOURCE

    How much do we really know about her research? I've heard a lot
    of negative things about Shroff, but here's an example of someone
    who recovered after being treated by her.

    #2
    Buck, I hope that most people would think that I am relatively open-minded and will consider therapies that most doctors would simply dismiss. I tried hard to remain open-minded about Geeta Shroff. To me, the question is not whether there is one or two patients who have shown some recovery from the treatment. There will always be some patient who will show miraculous therapies, if you treat enough people. This is well known from the laying on of hands and other "miracles" that have been perpetrated on people. The placebo effect is very strong.

    Neurological symptoms from Lyme's disease often recover after a period of time. Until recently, I was not a believer of placebo effects in spinal cord injury until we saw it in the clinical trials of fampridine. The control group showed significant placebo effects. So, lest anybody claim that there is no such thing as placebo in spinal cord injury, I think that it is not true, particularly for people who are incomplete.

    To me, Geeta Shroff lost all credibility with me when it became clear that she does not follow up on the patients, does not document their recovery over the long term, and does not do tests on the patients to show that the treatments work as she claims. She is injecting the cells intramuscularly (something that would guarantee the death of the cells that are being injected, by the way), charging people $500 a shot.

    Wise.

    Comment


      #3
      I have treated numerous individuals who have undergone various experimental procedures outside the US. Anecdotally, I believe I have seen the placebo effect, natural recovery (due to hard work, correct/updated diagnosis, hope….), and recovery by chance encounter (right injury underwent the more efficacious experimental treatment). More than one of the experimental procedures gave intramuscular injection of various cell types. I always thought to myself, “Aren’t intramuscular injections for SCI in general analogous to charging a car battery and filling its tank with gas in hopes it will help a bad alternator”?
      “As the cast of villains in SCI is vast and collaborative, so too must be the chorus of hero's that rise to meet them” Ramer et al 2005

      Comment


        #4
        i wish i could had improvement...i got improvement but that was bcos of effective physiotherapy..do stem cells effect after years? or takes time to show improvement?
        ChemistOnline.in

        Comment


          #5
          Unfettered by regulation, India pulls ahead on stem cell treatments

          Unfettered by regulation, India pulls ahead on stem cell treatments




          quote:

          Initially, Dr. Shroff explains that she did think about publishing her results. "You do try and get out there and at the end of the day, I am a doctor," she says. She tried to present at some conferences, but was rejected and told that there were already too many people presenting on embryonic stem cells. That's when she decided to patent her work instead. "With the patent, I could protect the technology. I could make sure that somebody who doesn't understand the business can't stop it." Once the patent is granted, Dr. Shroff will be able to move forward with the next step.

          The dream, she says, is to make stem cell injections available in pharmacies across the world, so that the process of stabilization and treatment can be started right at the onset of disease. She likens it to the discovery of penicillin. "That was the beginning of the antibiotic era, and it changed the entire face of infection around the world. This is similar to that."

          read:

          http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/i...ell-treatments

          Comment


            #6
            Manouli, this was already posted earlier. I moved the earlier post from the Stem Cell Research forum here and merged the two.

            I want to comment that this article is very misleading. Dr. Shroff's patent does not allow her to give the therapy to people without approval or to charge people for the therapy. It also does not legitimize the therapy. The fact that she would suggest that this is so (and the reporter would report it as such without any comment) is shocking and immediately suggests that the article itself cannot be trusted.

            It is also not true that India does not have regulations. To lure people into paying her many thousands of dollars for unproven therapies, using false and unsubstantiated claims of safety and efficacy is both illegal and unethical, even in India. I hope that somebody in the government of India realize how bad this is making India appear around the world.

            Wise.
            Last edited by Wise Young; 12 Oct 2009, 12:44 AM.

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by Wise Young View Post
              Manouli, this was already posted earlier. I moved the earlier post from the Stem Cell Research forum here and merged the two.

              I want to comment that this article is very misleading. Dr. Shroff's patent does not allow her to give the therapy to people without approval or to charge people for the therapy. It also does not legitimize the therapy. The fact that she would suggest that this is so (and the reporter would report it as such without any comment) is shocking and immediately suggests that the article itself cannot be trusted.

              It is also not true that India does not have regulations. To lure people into paying her many thousands of dollars for unproven therapies, using false and unsubstantiated claims of safety and efficacy is both illegal and unethical, even in India. I hope that somebody in the government of India realize how bad this is making India appear around the world.

              Wise.
              Thank you very much Dr. Young.

              Comment


                #8
                Adult Stem Cell in U.S.

                Originally posted by Buck_Nastier View Post
                SOURCE

                How much do we really know about her research? I've heard a lot
                of negative things about Shroff, but here's an example of someone
                who recovered after being treated by her.
                Buck:

                Checkout this site for possible adult stem cell trials in Covington, LA.. They are awaiting FDA human clinical trials approval http://www.tcacellulartherapy.com/.
                Aggie Mom 2007

                Comment


                  #9
                  My father gave one reference of Mr.Pravin, quadraplegic from 13 years chronic injury. he recently took Dr. Sunil waghmare stem cell therapy. Doctor is situated in bombay itself.

                  I had talk with Mr.Pravin and he told that he got improvement in bowel and bladder with just 10 days stemcell therapy.

                  I got the number of the doctor and i m going to visit him soon and also get in touch with patients treated.

                  Dr. Wise Young, Do u know the doctor in any case? i googled and found some articles and post of doctor. He is practising interventional radiologist and stem cell therapist. link
                  ChemistOnline.in

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by jhorn4012 View Post
                    Buck:

                    Checkout this site for possible adult stem cell trials in Covington, LA.. They are awaiting FDA human clinical trials approval http://www.tcacellulartherapy.com/.
                    Thanks, Jhorn.

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Originally posted by Shwetarose View Post
                      My father gave one reference of Mr.Pravin, quadraplegic from 13 years chronic injury. he recently took Dr. Sunil waghmare stem cell therapy. Doctor is situated in bombay itself.

                      I had talk with Mr.Pravin and he told that he got improvement in bowel and bladder with just 10 days stemcell therapy.

                      I got the number of the doctor and i m going to visit him soon and also get in touch with patients treated.

                      Dr. Wise Young, Do u know the doctor in any case? i googled and found some articles and post of doctor. He is practising interventional radiologist and stem cell therapist. link
                      Shweta, I am sorry but I don't know the doctor in Bombay. Wise.

                      Comment


                        #12
                        looking for a response

                        Originally posted by Wise Young View Post
                        Buck, I hope that most people would think that I am relatively open-minded and will consider therapies that most doctors would simply dismiss. I tried hard to remain open-minded about Geeta Shroff. To me, the question is not whether there is one or two patients who have shown some recovery from the treatment. There will always be some patient who will show miraculous therapies, if you treat enough people. This is well known from the laying on of hands and other "miracles" that have been perpetrated on people. The placebo effect is very strong.

                        Neurological symptoms from Lyme's disease often recover after a period of time. Until recently, I was not a believer of placebo effects in spinal cord injury until we saw it in the clinical trials of fampridine. The control group showed significant placebo effects. So, lest anybody claim that there is no such thing as placebo in spinal cord injury, I think that it is not true, particularly for people who are incomplete.

                        To me, Geeta Shroff lost all credibility with me when it became clear that she does not follow up on the patients, does not document their recovery over the long term, and does not do tests on the patients to show that the treatments work as she claims. She is injecting the cells intramuscularly (something that would guarantee the death of the cells that are being injected, by the way), charging people $500 a shot.

                        Wise.
                        Dr. Young,
                        I have a couple of concerns for which I would very much appreciate your response. I am the parent of a son who sustained a C5 complete injury about 16 months ago. We are here at Nu Tech in Delhi, after much research, inquiry and hand wringing. We have been here for 5 weeks and will continue for the duration of three months. So far, we are cautiously pleased with the results. He has new sustained volitional movement in his thumbs, and new found twitching in his forefingers. His breathing has improved significantly, and has seen small activity in his toes, ankles and calf. We have come from a year of significant physical therapy and exercise through our local facilities(Gillette, Sister Kenney and Courage Center) and extended trips to Project Walk and Quest to Walk. In spite of the hard work and effort, his functional recovery reached a plateau around February of this past year. It was around this time that I began to read whatever research material I could un-earth with my keyboard.
                        All my reading and inquiry has led me to one, I think defensible conclusion. Stem cells are effective in repairing the damage of injured spinal cords to varying degrees. This comes from published research from Tehran to Toronto, you included. This led us to the next step, which was the decision to wait, or act. That was the hand wringing portion of the process, which was in no way helped by the poor conditions in our own country concerning a real treatment option for a chronic patient, coupled by some researchers suggestion that treatment as close as possible to the time of injury would be most effective. Obviously, we decided to act, which led us to the next decision, where. I read many forums and reports involving China, Latin America, Portugal, Germany and others. It was the contact with several sci individuals who were treated here and their encouraging results that answered the where question. The most significant was a gentleman we met personally from Kansas with the same level of injury as my son. He gained significant improvement at the level of injury and two stages below. This confirmed the decision to be worth a shot, so to speak. And here we are… now for my concerns.
                        The first is regarding the ethics. You have responded to questions regarding Shroff, describing her treatments as unethical. I’m concerned with this somewhat broad swipe of an invocation. If the results are to my son’s even modest benefit and his consequent happiness, this passes the first test of utilitarian benefit. If she is doing no harm, which I have yet to witness or hear directly then again she passes the test. Of course medicine everywhere is always playing catch with this one. I have worked in healthcare for over 20 years, and have seen harm done on many occasions for many reasons, though seemingly meeting an acceptable threshold. She is also getting paid, as I assume all researchers are in this field. If you or another researching is being paid to perform human trials, why should Shroff not get paid what is necessary to sustain her efforts, especially if those efforts are providing some benefit. My concern over this persistent criticism around ethics comes principally from my disgust with the adulterous and very profitable bed that providers, pharmaceutical corporations and politicians share in the U.S. I am too well aware of the self- righteous hubris that’s in the water I’ve been drinking my entire life, and frames the world that I see. It has been a very difficult but worthy process to face my own arrogance throughout this difficult decision process. I am wondering how you remedy this, and assume that given the limitations placed upon your own valuable research, you must share some similar frustrations….the Bush administration notwithstanding (the ridiculous, ‘bait ‘n switch’ grandstanding of ‘snow-flake babies’, Sen. Brownbeck’s kindergarten classes before the House, et. al).
                        My second concern is over the seemingly dismissive comment regarding the placebo effect. While I do not dispute the very real and profound power of the mind over the body it inhabits, I frankly and respectfully think that dismissing any claims from this institution, or its patient’s as a mass placebo effect strikes me as intellectually lazy. I must confess that I do not know to what degree you have endeavored to pursue Shroff, or even what direct knowledge you have of her work, so I cannot assume. If you haven’t, then I consider your suspect comments somewhat suspect.
                        Thirdly, you say that she lost credibility when it became clear that she does not follow up on her patients, or perform tests… what evidence led you to become ‘clear’? I ask because I have met many patients who have been followed, and tested during multiple trips to this clinic. Repeat MRI’s, Scans and PT assessments seem to be commonplace around here and are given to patients who return to their primary physicians with scan in hand. You also mentioned the IM injections, which I must say were a little confusing to me, as I couldn’t understand the benefit. Shroff and Ashish’s response to my query regarding the IM injections was their belief that the stem cells act as a primer to areas which have atrophied, a primer for the more invasive procedures of Caudal, Epidural injections, Epidural catheter (with multiple injections) using neuronal and hematopoietic nudged cells. Your comments about the IM injections, and their relative cost (which I’m not sure where you arrived at that $500 a shot figure) were as misleading and even cavalier, as what you were suggesting was misleading. I sincerely mean no disrespect, but would appreciate and honest reply.
                        Given the implications that potentially successful stem cell treatments could bring to the planet, I understand her reticence to embrace those who pre-judge. There are profound cultural, ethical, proprietary, financial and political factors that could easily stunt the growth of this new practiced science, of which you must be painfully aware. Therefore it would seem open hands, albeit cautious would be more appropriate and efficacious than finger pointing and conjecture.
                        I have seen, in our short time here some significant gains made by many patients who have traveled farther, paid more, and fought harder than they should in order to be as well as is possible. It makes some of the posts on the Care Cure forum somewhat distasteful, seemingly fearful and narrow. Please remember my words spring from one who has been navigating through some difficult terrain, without much of a map.
                        Thank you for your consideration.

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Thank you for taking the time to post these thoughts. It takes a lot of courage to do what you are doing. I sincerely hope for the best outcomes for your son.
                          ______
                          Awe at my magnificent coq!

                          "You may say I'm a dreamer
                          but I'm not" - J. Lennon

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Originally posted by roadreck View Post
                            Dr. Young,
                            I have a couple of concerns for which I would very much appreciate your response. I am the parent of a son who sustained a C5 complete injury about 16 months ago. We are here at Nu Tech in Delhi, after much research, inquiry and hand wringing. We have been here for 5 weeks and will continue for the duration of three months. So far, we are cautiously pleased with the results. He has new sustained volitional movement in his thumbs, and new found twitching in his forefingers. His breathing has improved significantly, and has seen small activity in his toes, ankles and calf. We have come from a year of significant physical therapy and exercise through our local facilities(Gillette, Sister Kenney and Courage Center) and extended trips to Project Walk and Quest to Walk. In spite of the hard work and effort, his functional recovery reached a plateau around February of this past year. It was around this time that I began to read whatever research material I could un-earth with my keyboard.
                            All my reading and inquiry has led me to one, I think defensible conclusion. Stem cells are effective in repairing the damage of injured spinal cords to varying degrees. This comes from published research from Tehran to Toronto, you included. This led us to the next step, which was the decision to wait, or act. That was the hand wringing portion of the process, which was in no way helped by the poor conditions in our own country concerning a real treatment option for a chronic patient, coupled by some researchers suggestion that treatment as close as possible to the time of injury would be most effective. Obviously, we decided to act, which led us to the next decision, where. I read many forums and reports involving China, Latin America, Portugal, Germany and others. It was the contact with several sci individuals who were treated here and their encouraging results that answered the where question. The most significant was a gentleman we met personally from Kansas with the same level of injury as my son. He gained significant improvement at the level of injury and two stages below. This confirmed the decision to be worth a shot, so to speak. And here we are… now for my concerns.
                            The first is regarding the ethics. You have responded to questions regarding Shroff, describing her treatments as unethical. I’m concerned with this somewhat broad swipe of an invocation. If the results are to my son’s even modest benefit and his consequent happiness, this passes the first test of utilitarian benefit. If she is doing no harm, which I have yet to witness or hear directly then again she passes the test. Of course medicine everywhere is always playing catch with this one. I have worked in healthcare for over 20 years, and have seen harm done on many occasions for many reasons, though seemingly meeting an acceptable threshold. She is also getting paid, as I assume all researchers are in this field. If you or another researching is being paid to perform human trials, why should Shroff not get paid what is necessary to sustain her efforts, especially if those efforts are providing some benefit. My concern over this persistent criticism around ethics comes principally from my disgust with the adulterous and very profitable bed that providers, pharmaceutical corporations and politicians share in the U.S. I am too well aware of the self- righteous hubris that’s in the water I’ve been drinking my entire life, and frames the world that I see. It has been a very difficult but worthy process to face my own arrogance throughout this difficult decision process. I am wondering how you remedy this, and assume that given the limitations placed upon your own valuable research, you must share some similar frustrations….the Bush administration notwithstanding (the ridiculous, ‘bait ‘n switch’ grandstanding of ‘snow-flake babies’, Sen. Brownbeck’s kindergarten classes before the House, et. al).
                            My second concern is over the seemingly dismissive comment regarding the placebo effect. While I do not dispute the very real and profound power of the mind over the body it inhabits, I frankly and respectfully think that dismissing any claims from this institution, or its patient’s as a mass placebo effect strikes me as intellectually lazy. I must confess that I do not know to what degree you have endeavored to pursue Shroff, or even what direct knowledge you have of her work, so I cannot assume. If you haven’t, then I consider your suspect comments somewhat suspect.
                            Thirdly, you say that she lost credibility when it became clear that she does not follow up on her patients, or perform tests… what evidence led you to become ‘clear’? I ask because I have met many patients who have been followed, and tested during multiple trips to this clinic. Repeat MRI’s, Scans and PT assessments seem to be commonplace around here and are given to patients who return to their primary physicians with scan in hand. You also mentioned the IM injections, which I must say were a little confusing to me, as I couldn’t understand the benefit. Shroff and Ashish’s response to my query regarding the IM injections was their belief that the stem cells act as a primer to areas which have atrophied, a primer for the more invasive procedures of Caudal, Epidural injections, Epidural catheter (with multiple injections) using neuronal and hematopoietic nudged cells. Your comments about the IM injections, and their relative cost (which I’m not sure where you arrived at that $500 a shot figure) were as misleading and even cavalier, as what you were suggesting was misleading. I sincerely mean no disrespect, but would appreciate and honest reply.
                            Given the implications that potentially successful stem cell treatments could bring to the planet, I understand her reticence to embrace those who pre-judge. There are profound cultural, ethical, proprietary, financial and political factors that could easily stunt the growth of this new practiced science, of which you must be painfully aware. Therefore it would seem open hands, albeit cautious would be more appropriate and efficacious than finger pointing and conjecture.
                            I have seen, in our short time here some significant gains made by many patients who have traveled farther, paid more, and fought harder than they should in order to be as well as is possible. It makes some of the posts on the Care Cure forum somewhat distasteful, seemingly fearful and narrow. Please remember my words spring from one who has been navigating through some difficult terrain, without much of a map.
                            Thank you for your consideration.
                            roadreck,

                            Thank you so much for your very thoughtful and long post. I appreciate your thoughts and do not want to do anything to discourage you or your son. I also hope very much for his continued recovery. Therefore, I don't want to argue for or against the safety and efficacy of the therapy that your son is now receiving. Let me, however, address the issues relating to clinical trials and conflict of interest.

                            Without first hand experience, I can only rely on press and other reports of Geeta Shroff's work. From press reports, posts by people on this forum, and also interviews of several people that received therapy from Geeta Shroff, the following have been clear:
                            • Geeta Shroff is not doing a clinical trial. She is delivering a therapy that she claims will cure people and that is safe. I don't believe that what she is doing has been approved by any regulatory agency.
                            • She is making claims of efficacy and safety without publishing any data to support the claims, without having a regulatory agency review the data, and without obtaining assessment of the data by other doctors.
                            • She charges exorbitant amounts for the therapy. I estimated $500/injection because one person that I know spent $82,000 for 3 months of therapy and had about 160 injections. Please correct me if I am wrong.

                            I do not trust what Geeta Shroff says about the therapy because she has a serious conflict of interest. Not only is this cell transplantation "her therapy" but she has a financial conflict of interest because she charges patients large amounts for the therapy. I assume that her clinic is financially dependent on the income from the therapy. She therefore has strong motivation to say that the therapy is safe and effective, even if it is not. Unfortunately, we will probably never know whether the therapy is effective or not. Because of the way she is handling the situation, she is unlikely ever to achieve the trust of the medical community in India or around the world. This is sad because, if her therapy is safe and effective as she claimed, it could be used to reduce suffering and save the lives of millions of people. At best, she can perhaps treat another 10,000 people in her lifetime.

                            You suggest that I receive payment for my research and that Geeta Shroff does also. I respectfully suggest that the situations are not comparable. The clinical trials that I organize do not charge patients for the treatments or participation in the trials. Yes, I receive a salary as a tenured and endowed professor at Rutgers University for my teaching and research. I do not receive any payment for any of the clinical trials or networks that I organize, from any of the companies that contribute therapies for the trials, or from any of many spinal-injured people and families who participate in the trials or ask me for my opinions. I volunteer my time and effort for organizing the clinical trials. I pay for my own expenses, including my travel, lodging, food, and communication costs associated with all my work for the clinical trials. In addition, I personally donate substantial amounts (more than $10,000) every year to support the research and the clinical trials. While we are asking people to support the clinical trials by donating $1 a day to the http://JustADollarPlease.Org, the funds go to Rutgers University where they are used solely to support the activities of the SCINetUSA.

                            You may want to ask why I am so careful. I am a director of ChinaSCINet and SCINetUSA, with responsibilities for helping shape decisions on what therapies will be tested in the trials, I want to avoid any possible conflict of interest. So, for example, I do not own stock or receive any payments from Stemcyte, the company that is contributing umbilical cord blood cells for the trials. I give them advice for free, like I do here on CareCure. They may choose to heed my advice or even claim that I am their advisor, but they don't pay me for the advice. Whether the therapy works or does not work in the trial, I can recommend for or against the therapy without conflict of interest. My interest is solely to find therapies that are safe and effective. I will not be making money from any of the treatments that will be tested in the trials. I do not depend on the clinical trial funding for my laboratory research. All this is because I want to be credible when we present the results of our clinical trial.

                            The goal of clinical trials is to demonstrate safety and efficacy so that many doctors will apply the therapies to many people.

                            Wise.
                            Last edited by Wise Young; 17 Oct 2009, 11:10 AM.

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Greetings,

                              These posts are excellent and answering a lot of questions. Roadreck, thanks for the personal experiences, I hope your son continues to keep rocking.
                              When I was first injured in July of 2008, I seriously considered pursuing Dr. Shroff's treatment. After communicating with Dr. Shroff herself, my friends & family, researchers here in The States, doctors, my neuroscience professors, etc... it became clear, to me, that I should not go.
                              I still follow some of her patients' blogs, and always read threads about her here. A few months ago, the patient listed some general facts about the treatment, as told to her, by Dr. Shroff. Some of these facts contradict what I have learned about how hESCs could work in a human treatment. Here are some of the highlights:

                              -Out of 150 x SCI patients suffering from a complete SCI, over a period of 1,000 days of human embryonic stem cell treatment, all patients showed 66% improvement.

                              -No blood matching is required for patients undergoing hESC treatment.

                              -hESCs are basically “repair” cells. Wherever there is an infection in the body a chemical messenger is secreted signaling infection. When injected into the blood stream, Dr. Shroff’s pre-differentiated hESCs have the capability to home into those cells in the body that need repair.

                              -With very progressive diseases such as ALS/MND, Parkinsonism, MS, MD etc., the goal is to stabilize the disease. In order to keep the progressive disease stable, administering hESCs will be required for the rest of the patient’s life.

                              -Generally speaking, the older the patient, the more hESCs are needed and the more visits required.

                              -Females respond faster to hESC treatment (due to their hormones).

                              -Most patients at Nu Tech Mediworld receive one of two pre-differentiated stem lines:
                              -Haemopoietic stem line (promoting the formation of blood cells)

                              -Neuronal stem line (neuron: specialized cells of the nervous system)

                              Dr. Young, could you should shed some of your wisdom regarding these bits of limited information? For instance, if one had more than one line of hESCs, would one need more than one embryo to create multiple lines? Another questions is, what good would injecting pre-differentiated neuronal stem cells intramuscularly into the arm do?




                              fact source: http://amandaboxtel.wordpress.com/20...ech-mediworld/
                              Last edited by captainwelch; 17 Oct 2009, 1:16 PM. Reason: spelling fix

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X