“Hello, I thought you would like to know that my stem cell in my left knee has worked. I didn’t expect it to take so long but I have had little to no pain for the past two months. Thank you all again for your care and please advise your patients to be patient! If not for Covid, I would have had knee replacement several months ago. Only good thing about Covid!”
I received this e-mail message of gratitude this morning and I began to think what this patient’s recovery might have been following a Total Knee Replacement (TKR). In the latter scenario, maximum medical improvement is not realized on the average for over six months or longer. Following a Stem Cell procedure, Maximum Medical Improvement may take six months or longer. In the population of patients who undergo a TKR, 40% are left with an incomplete recovery; that is, some pain and a significant permanent loss of motion. In those who opt for the Stem Cell intervention to relieve symptoms of arthritis and improve functional capacity, our data suggest 10% of patients don’t experience satisfaction. Following a failed Total Knee Replacement, outcome, the choices are to accept the permanent alteration of life style or undergo yet a second major surgical procedure; namely, a revision (ouch). Following a Stem cell procedure that doesn’t provide the sought-after outcome, we still offer a needle and not a knife to improve the end results.
Looking back at 2020 and looking forward to 2021, based on observations following our regenerative medicine interventions, I will adjust my post intervention management with a more concentrated Growth Factor/ PRP booster. Our evidence-based results over the past several months using Growth Factors in higher concentrations have been most rewarding. As many readers of this Blog are aware, I am working closely with Personalized Stem Cells, Inc. and the FDA to help launch the next Adipose based Stem Cell Clinical Trial. It is our hope that the Trial will be approved by the end of Q1 or the start of Q2. In the interim, if you are experiencing pain and functional limitation from knee arthritis, consider a Growth Factor /PRP concentrate intervention. While there is an out-of-pocket fee for the treatment to keep you going, ultimately, for those who meet the inclusion criteria for the PSC Clinical Trial, there will be a facility fee but no out of pocket expense for the entire Adipose Based Stem Cell undertaking.
To learn more, follow my website at www.sheinkopmd.com.
To schedule a consultation call (312) 475-1893
Tags: arthritis, arthritis treatment, regenerative medicine, stem cell, stem cell therapy
Saturday evening, we returned from four days of fly fishing for Bone Fish, Permit, Jacks, Tarpon and Snook in Punta Allen, Mexico, three hours south of Cancun. The adventure involves standing on the front of a boat for up to six hours a day, with an occasional break. It becomes arduous and exhausting; but exceedingly gratifying and that’s why we do it year after year. Situated in the Mexican State of Quintana Roo in the Si’an Ka’an biosphere, Punta Allen is a perfect base for the type of fishing we love while allowing us to enjoy the Pelicans, Pink Spoonbills, Frigates, mockingbirds, Flamingoes and occasional crocodile, dolphin and manatee. The beaches on the ocean side are pristine so a 5PM swim after fishing allows the knee and hip rehabilitation to continue.
In anticipation of the physical demands, I underwent an autologous concentrated Platelet, Plasma, and Growth Factor Protein knee and hip intervention two weeks prior. My blood was recovered via a standard blood draw, placed in a centrifuge after which it was processed and filtered. The resulting concentrate was then injected under ultrasound guidance into my knees and hips. While my hips were quite uncomfortable for 72 hours following the injections, by time we arrived in Mexico, I had no limitations or symptoms requiring me to alter my activities.
Let me explain why I chose the blood born option in anticipation of my needs rather than that of Bone Marrow Concentrate or participation in the Adipose Fat based Personalize Stem Cell Clinical Trial. If I were younger, the Bone Marrow Concentrate option makes a lot of sense as we have scientific outcomes data to support said alternative. Seeing how the number of Adult Mesenchymal Stem cells in bone marrow diminish with age, my eyes are set on the PSC Trial. Science tells us that the number of stem cells in adipose tissue do not diminish with age. My particular issue is that both of my knees are affected by advanced Osteoarthritis so I have to wait for FDA approval of the bilateral Personalized Stem cell Trial. Given my excellent response to the Blood derived Platelets, Plasma and Growth Factor Proteins following the injections two years ago, I elected to take advantage of the opportunity to repeat the interventions while waiting for the FDA approval of the PSC Trial allowing both knees to receive millions of stem cells.
To learn more about your treatment options for an osteoarthritic joint, visit my website at www.sheinkopmd.com. You may call to schedule an appointment or consultation, (312) 475-1893.
For those interested, The Personalized Stem Cell trial web site is www.PersonalizedStemCells.Com.
Tags: autologous platelet concentrate, blood plasma, Concentrated Stem Cell Plasma, stem cell
“Why bother with the truth when you can make it all up”
“As practicing physicians, scientists, and regulatory experts we have increasingly observed aggressive advertising and sales tactics being used by alternative health clinics (chiropractors, naturopaths, and acupuncturists) as well as physicians and mid-level providers to market “stem cell” treatments derived from birth tissues. One example is full-page print ads in major newspapers used to recruit elderly patients and others desperate for effective treatments to seminars where prospective patients are informed that they can be injected with millions of live and functional stem cells to relieve their symptoms. The products used are derived from birth tissues such as umbilical cord blood and/or Wharton’s Jelly or amniotic fluid/membrane. Many patients spend thousands of dollars on these therapies to treat orthopedic problems and/or a myriad of other incurable diseases. The seminars typically state that there are robust clinical data supporting the safety and efficacy of these products, regardless of the condition or pathology being treated, when no such clinical evidence exists. In addition, some manufacturers of birth tissues claim that their products contain live and functional stem cells, while other manufacturers do not make these same claims. Claims of live cells are not compliant with FDA regulations, which require this type of donor tissue to be non-viable.
To date, two research investigations have been conducted which document the content of commercially available amniotic and cord blood products sold by FDA-registered manufacturers (those regulated solely under section 361 of the Public Health Service (PHS) Act). We are aware of additional investigations that are in progress. Both Berger, et al. and Becktell from the Fortier laboratory at Cornell University, found that these amniotic and cord blood products did not contain live or functional stem cells. In addition, both research groups found that many of the growth factor levels in these products were significantly lower than those found in common autologous orthobiologic products like platelet-rich plasma. Fortier et al. did report that these products do contain proteins like lumican and cytokines, which may positively impact orthopedic injuries, but concluded that more research is needed before any claims can be made. While there are early clinical data on stem cells that are isolated from fresh birth tissues and culture expanded, these studies used treatments which are not analogous to the commercially available, cryopreserved, FDA registered birth tissue products. In addition, it should be noted that while the clinical evidence in this area is evolving and one day may support the clinical efficacy of cryopreserved birth tissues for some orthopedic applications, no such evidence exists at this time. In particular, we are aware of FDA approved clinical trials that use these tissues for diseases such as knee osteoarthritis, which are ongoing.
Consensus Statement: The aggressive marketing approach currently used by practitioners and clinics regarding various birth tissue products as safe and effective “stem cell therapy” is not supported by the existing scientific literature.”
Tags: Adult Mesenchymal Stem Cells, amniotic fluid, amniotic stem cells, Bone Marrow Concentrate, Clinical Studies, clinical trial, Clinical Trial. Mitchell B. Sheinkop, Cord blood, Cornell University, cryopreserved, FDA, Federal Trade Commission, Food and Drug Administration, FTC, joint pain, joint regeneration, joint replacement, Osteoarthritis, Public Health Service, Regenerative, research, stem cell, stem cell seminar, stem cell shot, surgery, umbilical cord blood, umbilical cord stem cells, Wharton’s Jelly
Why Should This Blog Matter To You?
- Stem cell treatments are NOT FDA cleared in the United States
- FDA is scrutinizing physicians and centers that are marketing stem cells
Beware of centers that are offering to:
- Relieve pain
- “Regeneration” of tissues
- Avoid surgery
- Treating a variety of inflammatory, degenerative, or autoimmune conditions
Beware of Stem Cells Clinics!
- Many of these “stem cell clinics” are operated by chiropractors or providers that do NOT have a specialty or advanced training in the musculoskeletal system.
- They simply do not have the training necessary to perform these injections nor are they licensed to so do.
- In some cases, surgery is needed. These providers may not evaluate the need for a surgical procedure.
Federal Trade Commission Press Release: https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2018/10/ftc-stops-deceptive-health-claims-stem-cell-therapy-clinic
FTC Court Documents: https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement/cases-proceedings/172-3062/regenerative-medical-group-inc
The Complaint filed by the FTC on October 12th states the following:
Defendant Henderson is aware that the vast majority of amniotic clinical studies in the scientific literature has been conducted on animal models. There are no human clinical studies in the scientific literature showing that amniotic stem cell therapy cures, treats, or mitigates diseases of health conditions in humans, and the medical community considers amniotic stem cell therapy to be an experimental and unproven treatment. (p. 4)
The representations set forth in Paragraph 21 […Defendants have represented…that their stem cell therapy: cures [everything]…Is comparable to or superior to conventional medical treatments in curing, mitigating, or treating specific diseases or health conditions including [everything]…] are false or were not substantiated at the time the representations were made. (p. 21)
The FTC essentially has said that there is no clinical basis to claim a therapeutic benefit to treating patients with amniotic stem cells, so the claims and representations by Dr. Henderson constitute deceptive practices and false advertisement.
If you connect the dots, it would suggest that Dr. Henderson engaged in fraud by taking money from patients and treating them with a preparation for which there is no clinically valid proof of therapeutic benefit. Regardless of whether the Department of Justice gets after him for a criminal complaint of fraud or not, I think organizations that offer up a worthless therapy consisting of amniotic stem cells (until proven otherwise with Level 1 studies) could be good targets for class action lawsuits by defrauded patients. The same situation doesn’t apply to PRP and BMC, (what I do) since there is plenty of clinical evidence of therapeutic benefit including my scientific article published in December, 2018.
Sheinkop, et.al Transnational Medicine – published Dec. 13 2018
A specific protocol of autologous bone marrow concentrate and platelet products versus exercise therapy for symptomatic knee osteoarthritis; a randomized control trial with 2 year follow-up.
If you want to complain to the FDA about having received Amniotic Fluid without benefit, use this link:
Tags: Adult Mesenchymal Stem Cells, amniotic fluid, amniotic stem cells, Bone Marrow Concentrate, Clinical Studies, clinical trial, Clinical Trial. Mitchell B. Sheinkop, Cord blood, FDA, joint pain, joint regeneration, joint replacement, Osteoarthritis, Regenerative, research, stem cell, surgery
I swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, so help me G_d. Injured cartilage in a skeletally mature adult typically doesn’t heal on its own; surgical techniques are needed in an attempt to repair and replace cartilage. These latter procedures are appropriate for specific cartilage injury, rather than the widespread cartilage changes found in the osteoarthritic joint. That is not to say that someday soon, we may have the ability to regenerate cartilage. Research is ongoing in regenerative medicine with continual progress as evidenced by preliminary success in spinal cord injured patients:
StemCyte gets FDA green light to continue studying spinal cord injury treatment stem cells.
Now for the bad news. In spite of false news generated by the charlatans, parasites, camp followers and hucksters in their Regenerative Medicine seminars, print media and television adds; there is no scientific evidence to support their claims of cartilage regeneration, hair restoration, cure of erectile dysfunction, so on and so forth.
Stem cell fraud? Couple says therapy gave them ‘false hope’
“Unfortunately, what I had hoped to be a hard-hitting expose turned into limp-noodle babbling. Another missed opportunity.” Continuing the commentary about regenerative medicine clinic charlatans and fraud started by NBC, when a patient showed me a brochure from yet another group that holds itself out to treat every abnormal medical condition from A to Z with “Stem Cells”, I suggested that he request data regarding their successes. Please bear in mind the self- contradicting adage that Always and Never statements are always false and never true. They are frequently used by people who suffer from personality disorders. On Friday he sent me the response to his inquiry regarding outcomes at a one of the national stem cell clinics.
“success rates per our clinical research network are VERY encouraging: Orthopedic: knee 83%, hip 80%, back (cervical, thoracic, lumbar, sacral 80% ave., ED 77%, Cataracts 100%” Remember what I just wrote about Always and Never?
The good news though is that there is emerging scientific evidence to justify Joint Restoration with a cellular orthopedic procedure. While an image of an arthritic joint allows for identification of cartilage and meniscal changes, that same image will frequently be consistent with bone marrow edema, and thickening of the bone adjacent to a joint (subchondral sclerosis) as well as loose bodies within the joint. As cartilage does not have a nerve supply, the pain generation in Osteoarthritis more probable than not is the result of inflammation of the synovial joint lining and the subchondral bone. While there is no scientific means of re-growing cartilage after age 40 at this time-defects may be filled by surgery-orthopedic surgeons focusing on Cellular Orthopedics have developed methods to restore the joint function by blocking the pain generators, restoring healthy subchondral bone, and reversing bone marrow edema.
To schedule an Evidence Based Consultation, call (312) 475-1893
You may read my Blog and explore my published research articles on the website www.sheinkopmd.com
Tags: arthritis, bone marrow edema, cartilage regeneration, cellular orthopedic, Hip pain, inflammation, joint health, joint pain, knee pain, medicine, meniscus tear, Osteoarthritis, restoration, soft tissue repair, stem cell, stem cell injection, subchondral bone