Lipofilling Improved Pain and Function in Patients with Finger Osteoarthritis

By Pat Anson, PNN Editor

People who suffer from painful arthritic fingers have few treatment options to choose from. They can wrap their hand in a splint, take anti-inflammatory drugs or get steroid injections into their finger joints – all of which provide only temporary relief. More invasive surgical treatments include joint fusions or reconstruction, which can impair hand motion and take weeks to recover from.

German researchers have found that a less invasive treatment commonly used in plastic surgery – injecting fat tissue from one part of the body into another -- can provide lasting improvements in pain and function for patients with finger osteoarthritis. The technique – called lipofilling – resulted in “highly significant clear improvement" with no complications in a small pilot study of 15 patients.     

"We believe that for our patients the reduction of pain represents the most striking and important result, which also has the most pronounced and highly significant effect," said co-author Max Meyer-Marcotty, MD, Clinic for Plastic, Reconstructive, and Aesthetic Surgery/Hand Surgery in Lüdenscheid, Germany.

"Even over a long-term follow-up, the transfer of fatty tissue to arthritic fingers joints appears to provide a safe and minimally invasive alternative to conventional surgery for patients with osteoarthritis.”

In the lipofilling procedure, Meyer-Marcotty and his colleagues used liposuction to take a small sample of each patient's fatty tissue from their upper thigh or hip area. The autologous fat was then injected into their arthritic finger joints. Patients wore a splint around the treated fingers and took pain relievers for a week. There were no infections or other complications reported.

The researchers followed outcomes in 25 finger joints for an average of 44 months after treatment, and found that pain scores fell from a median of 6 (on a 10-point scale) before treatment to just 0.5 points at follow-up. Grip strength of the treated fingers approximately doubled, while fist closure and hand function performing everyday tasks also improved.

“Even after a follow-up examination period of 44 months, the transfer of fatty tissue to arthritic finger joints has shown itself to be a minimally invasive, safe, and promising alternative to conventional surgical techniques aimed at alleviating arthritic complaints, and one that among other things entails a highly significant improvement in postsurgical pain levels,” researchers reported in the journal Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery. “Further long-term follow-up studies of even larger patient cohorts would be needed to further corroborate these initial positive findings.”

In recent years, lipofilling procedures have been increasingly used in plastic and reconstructive surgery, as well as stem cell therapy.

When injected into patients, mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) in fat tissue can regenerate damaged or diseased tissue, including cartilage in arthritic joints. A small 2019 study found that MSCs collected from a patient’s bone marrow can significantly reduce pain from knee osteoarthritis for up to a year.

Osteoarthritis is a progressive joint disorder caused by the inflammation of soft tissue, which leads to thinning of cartilage and joint damage in the knees, hips, fingers and spine.

"The chance to preserve the joint with a minimally invasive procedure is of particular interest in the early, albeit painful, phases of finger osteoarthritis," said Meyer-Marcotty. "Since the lipofilling procedure is nondestructive, conventional joint surgery can still be performed later, if needed."

Stem Cell Marketers Sued for Misleading Health Claims

By Pat Anson, PNN Editor

The U.S. Federal Trade Commission and the Georgia Attorney General are suing the co-founders of the Stem Cell Institute of America for marketing misleading health claims to seniors about stem cell therapy.

The agencies’ 40-page complaint against chiropractors Steven Peyroux and Brent Detelich alleges they promoted stem cell treatments nationwide through deceptive marketing schemes with other chiropractors and healthcare providers.

The promotions claimed that stem cell injections were superior to surgery, steroids and pain medication in treating arthritis, joint pain and other orthopedic conditions. The injections cost as much as $5,000 per joint, with patients often getting multiple injections.

“These defendants advertised expensive stem cell injections with baseless pain-relief claims, and provided marketing materials and training to chiropractors to do the same,” Samuel Levine, Acting Director of the FTC Bureau of Consumer Protection, said in a statement.

“At best, the use of unproven products or therapies can cost consumers thousands of dollars without affording them any results,” said Georgia Attorney General Chris Carr. “At worst, it can be harmful to their health. Our office will continue to hold accountable businesses that make unsubstantiated claims and violate the law – especially those that target our older or at-risk adults.”

Peyroux and Detelich founded the Georgia-based Stem Cell Institute of America (SCIA) in 2015 and operated under various business names, including Regenerative Medicine Institute of America, Superior Healthcare and Physicians Business Solutions.

According to the Georgia Attorney General’s Office, the companies “generated millions of dollars in revenue” by advising chiropractors around the country how to add stem cell therapy to their practices. It also trained them how to recruit new patients, and provided marketing and advertising material.

One newspaper ad invited patients to attend a free seminar where they could learn how stem cell therapy “can change your life” and stop their joint pain “without costly and painful surgery.”

SCIA also had its own YouTube channel, where videos pitched stem cells as “one of the most cutting-edge noninvasive and nonsurgical treatments for joint and arthritis pain.”

The complaint alleges that SCIA conducted no clinical testing to demonstrate its advertised claims and that no scientific studies supported them. The complaint also alleges the defendants violated Georgia’s Fair Business Practices Act related to the distribution of false or misleading information.

SCIA ad.png

STEM CELL INSTITUTE AD

SCIA, Regenerative Medicine Institute of America, and Superior Healthcare filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy protection in 2019.  

Physicians Business Solutions continues to operate and recently hosted a training seminar for chiropractors in Atlanta. It is scheduled to hold another seminar in October at the Trump Hotel in Chicago. The company did not respond to a request for comment.

New Drug Could Improve Effectiveness of Stem Cell Therapy

By Pat Anson, PNN Editor

Scientists have developed an experimental drug that can lure stem cells to damaged tissues and help them heal -- a discovery being touted as a major advancement in the field of regenerative medicine.

The findings, recently published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), could improve the effectiveness of stem cell therapy in treating spinal cord injuries, stroke, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), Parkinson’s disease and other neurodegenerative disorders. It could also expand the use of stem cells to treat conditions such as heart disease and arthritis. 

“The ability to instruct a stem cell where to go in the body or to a particular region of a given organ is the Holy Grail for regenerative medicine,” said lead author Evan Snyder, MD, director of the Center for Stem Cells & Regenerative Medicine at Sanford Burnham Prebys Medical Discovery Institute in La Jolla, CA. “Now, for the first time ever, we can direct a stem cell to a desired location and focus its therapeutic impact.”

Over a decade ago, Snyder and his colleagues discovered that stem cells are drawn to inflammation -- a biological “fire alarm” that signals tissue damage has occurred. However, using inflammation as a therapeutic lure for stem cells wasn’t advisable because they could further inflame diseased or damaged organs, joints and other tissue.

To get around that problem, scientists modified CXCL12 -- an inflammatory molecule that Snyder’s team discovered could guide stem cells to sites in need of repair— to create a drug called SDV1a. The new drug works by enhancing stem cell binding, while minimizing inflammatory signals.

“Since inflammation can be dangerous, we modified CXCL12 by stripping away the risky bit and maximizing the good bit,” Snyder explained. “Now we have a drug that draws stem cells to a region of pathology, but without creating or worsening unwanted inflammation.”

To demonstrate its effectiveness, Snyder’s team injected SDV1a and human neural stem cells into the brains of mice with a neurodegenerative disease called Sandhoff disease. The experiment showed that the drug helped stem cells migrate and perform healing functions, which included extending lifespan, delaying symptom onset, and preserving motor function for much longer than mice that didn’t receive the drug. Importantly, the stem cells also did not worsen the inflammation.

Researchers are now testing SDV1a’s ability to improve stem cell therapy in a mouse model of ALS, also known as Lou Gehrig’s disease, which is caused by a progressive loss of motor neurons in the brain. Previous studies conducted by Snyder’s team found that broadening the spread of neural stem cells helps more motor neurons survive — so they are hopeful that SDV1a will improve the effectiveness of neuroprotective stem cells and help slow the onset and progression of ALS. 

“We are optimistic that this drug’s mechanism of action may potentially benefit a variety of neurodegenerative disorders, as well as non-neurological conditions such as heart disease, arthritis and even brain cancer,” says Snyder. “Interestingly, because CXCL12 and its receptor are implicated in the cytokine storm that characterizes severe COVID-19, some of our insights into how to selectively inhibit inflammation without suppressing other normal processes may be useful in that arena as well.”

Snyder’s research is supported by the National Institutes of Health, U.S. Department of Defense, National Tay-Sachs & Allied Disease Foundation, Children’s Neurobiological Solutions Foundation, and the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM).

“Thanks to decades of investment in stem cell science, we are making tremendous progress in our understanding of how these cells work and how they can be harnessed to help reverse injury or disease,” says Maria Millan, MD, president and CEO of CIRM. “This drug could help speed the development of stem cell treatments for spinal cord injury, Alzheimer’s, heart disease and many other conditions for which no effective treatment exists.”

Non-Profit Offers Free Stem Cell Therapy to Veterans

By A. Rahman Ford, PNN Columnist

No group is more worthy of the revolutionary benefits of stem cell therapy than America’s military veterans. While the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) thinks “the field is in its infancy and much more research is needed” before stem cells are offered as treatment, brave practitioners are stepping forward to help veterans NOW.

Dr. Joseph Kanan and his staff at the Tullahoma Chiropractic Center are providing free stem cell therapy for veterans who suffer from chronic pain. Kanan – in partnership with Veterans in Pain – recently performed his first pro bono procedure on a veteran named Ryan, who has severe hip pain. Stem cell injections into Ryan’s hip, which are not covered by insurance, normally would have cost $6,500. Ryan got them for free.

“I think veterans do a lot for our country and there are very few doctors that are performing medical procedures like this,” Kanan told The Tullahoma News. “We were very glad to be able to do this for him.”

Kanan says his Tennessee clinic performs stem cell therapy for veterans twice a month and has had good results so far. One patient was able to avoid a knee replacement and reported consistent improvement one year after the procedure. Patients can expect to experience 10 percent improvement every month for 10 months.

Veterans in Pain is a non-profit that connects military veterans with civilian physicians who provide free regenerative medicine treatments for chronic pain. VIP has provided $250,000 worth of services since 2019.

(Update: Veterans in Pain no longer directly links individual veterans with stem cell providers. The organization’s focus has shifted to advocacy — specifically changes in legislation to make stem cell therapy more accessible to veterans.)

VIP founder and president Micaela Bensko is herself a stem cell therapy recipient. She spent years in a wheelchair after an accident in her driveway left her with severe spine damage that led to arachnoiditis, a chronic inflammation of spinal nerves. A friend suggested stem cell therapy, which inspired Bensko to establish VIP as a resource for veterans. 

Veterans in Pain connects each veteran with a volunteer physician in their area. If one cannot be located, the cost of transportation and accommodations are covered for treatments, as they were for Ryan. Veterans associated with VIP visit schools, organizations and corporations sharing their story of recovery. Most of VIP’s funding is provided by small individual donations, grants and grassroots fundraising. 

According to the National Institutes of Health, nearly two-thirds of veterans report having chronic pain, with about 9% having severe pain. Chronic pain among veterans is closely associated with mental health conditions such as depression, anxiety, poor sleep and substance abuse disorders. Many veterans suffer from more than one condition.

Because of red tape and a shortage of pain management specialists at the VA, many veterans suffering from chronic pain are left devoid of proper diagnosis and treatment, causing many to self-medicate or search for answers on their own.  Chronic pain can lead to substance abuse, a common and growing trend among veterans. A 2017 study found that 30% of military suicides were preceded by alcohol or drug abuse.

The dire plight of military veterans suffering from chronic pain is yet another compelling reason for the FDA to loosen its regulation of stem cell therapy. Our heroes are counting on it.

A. Rahman Ford, PhD, is a lawyer and research professional. He is a graduate of Rutgers University and the Howard University School of Law, where he served as Editor-in-Chief of the Howard Law Journal. Rahman lives with chronic inflammation in his digestive tract and is unable to eat solid food. He has received stem cell treatment in China.

Stem Cell Trial Significantly Reduced Osteoarthritis Knee Pain

By A. Rahman Ford, PNN Columnist

A small clinical trial has shown that a single injection of autologous stem cells derived from a patient’s own body fat can significantly reduce osteoarthritis knee pain for up to a year with no serious side effects, according to findings published in the American Journal of Sports Medicine.

A total of 39 osteoarthritis patients participated in the Phase 2 placebo-controlled trial. Some participants received injections into their knees of stromal vascular fraction (SVF) cells derived from adipose fat tissue, while others received placebo injections.

"Our randomized, controlled clinical trial is the first cellular therapy study for osteoarthritis to meet study endpoints using autologous adipose stromal cells for a point-of-care therapy. Eighty-eight percent of subjects responded greater than placebo at one year and reported a median 87% improvement in pain, stiffness and function," said William Cimino, PhD, CEO of GID BIO, which funded the study. GID BIO develops cellular therapies for degenerative musculoskeletal, dermal and other chronic diseases.

SVF therapy is controversial because it is not yet FDA-approved. Some stem cell clinics currently using SVF therapy are in the crosshairs of the FDA, with ongoing federal litigation in Florida and California. That’s what makes the new study findings significant.

"Publishing this data signifies real science and a breakthrough in regenerative medicine. We've completed a prior safety trial, an FDA-approved Phase 2b trial, and are now beginning a Phase 3 pivotal trial. Physicians will be able to use the SVF-2 technology to provide a cellular therapy option for patients," said principal investigator Jaime Garza, MD, Professor of Orthopedic Surgery at Tulane University School of Medicine.

Interestingly, Garza is a former star football player at Tulane whose fledgling NFL career was cut short by nagging knee injuries. As PNN has reported, regenerative cell therapies are increasing in popularity among NFL players and other professional athletes, who often have chronic pain from lingering injuries.

Knee osteoarthritis (OA) is the most prevalent joint disease in the United States, affecting nearly 1 in 5 Americans aged 45 years and older. Since the mid-20th century, knee OA has doubled in prevalence, due primarily to age and obesity. Women are more likely than men to have knee OA and have more severe pain.

Total knee arthroplasty – a procedure that attempts to restore function by resurfacing the knee joint – is the only surgical intervention for knee OA. Other treatments include anti-inflammatory medications, physical therapy and steroid injections.  The FDA is also considering a new drug application for tanezumab, a biologic drug that blocks pain signals from reaching the brain.

“While current nonoperative modalities can offer symptomatic relief, these treatment modalities often fail, ultimately leading to knee arthroplasty. There is a need for more effective nonoperative knee OA treatment modalities, especially ones that may arrest or even reverse disease progression,” wrote Garza.

A. Rahman Ford, PhD, is a lawyer and research professional. He is a graduate of Rutgers University and the Howard University School of Law, where he served as Editor-in-Chief of the Howard Law Journal. Rahman lives with chronic inflammation in his digestive tract and is unable to eat solid food. He has received stem cell treatment in China.

Mayo Clinic Research Shows Stem Cells May Treat Paralysis

By A. Rahman Ford, PNN Columnist

In a case report recently published in Mayo Clinic Proceedings, a 53-year-old California man paralyzed from the neck down in a surfing accident experienced dramatic improvement after an injection of his own stem cells.  

Chris Barr can walk again and has shown other improvements in his motor and sensory functions. His case is significant, because currently there is no FDA-approved therapy that can reverse the devastating life-changing effects of paralysis from spinal cord injuries.

Barr’s inspiring story can be seen in this video produced by the Mayo Clinic:

Barr was one of 10 paralyzed adults enrolled in a Phase I clinical trial that looked at the safety, side effects and ideal dose of stem cells. Early findings show that patient response varied. Mayo researchers call Barr a “superresponder” because his treatment was so successful.

"In this case report, the first patient was a superresponder, but there are other patients in the trial who are moderate responders and nonresponders," says first author Mohamad Bydon, MD, a Mayo Clinic neurologic surgeon. "One of our objectives in this study and future studies is to better delineate who will be a responder and why patients respond differently to stem cell injections.”

According to the National Spinal Cord Injury Statistical Center, about 288,000 Americans currently suffer from a spinal cord injury (SCI). Over 17,000 Americans suffer SCI’s each year, costing the health care system over $40 billion annually.  The estimated lifetime cost for each patient can range from the hundreds of thousands into the millions of dollars, and their life expectancy rates fall far below those without SCI.

Chronic pain is a serious problem that can result from SCI, affecting about two-thirds of patients, with one out of three reporting their pain as severe. With the inherent limitations of medical interventions such as surgery, medication and physical rehabilitation, new strategies are needed to improve functional outcomes and quality of life.

Although stem cells have  successfully been used to treat inflammatory conditions that affect the spinal cord, such as arachnoiditis, published reports on their safety and effectiveness in treating SCI‘s are scant.

Animal studies have demonstrated effectiveness in treating SCI with embryonic stem cells and human neural stem cells. Mesenchymal stem cells (MSC’s) derived from bone marrow have also been successfully used to treat SCI in rats, as have human umbilical cord-derived stem cells. And adipose stem cells derived from fat have been used to improve functional recovery in dogs with SCI.

Barr’s Impressive Results

After being paralyzed in the surfing accident, Chris Barr’s condition initially improved after a posterior cervical decompression and fusion. However, that improvement plateaued after six months. Barr had complete loss of motor function below the site of his injury, including bowel and bladder sensation.

Barr enrolled in the Mayo study nine months after his injury. His stem cells were collected by taking a small amount of fat from his abdomen. Over eight weeks, the cells were grown in the laboratory to 100 million cells. Those MSC cells were then injected into Barr’s lower back, 11 months after his injury.

The results from the therapy were impressive and long lasting. Eighteen months after stem cell injection, Barr’s total upper extremity motor score increased from 35 to 44. There was also considerable improvement in his total lower extremity motor scores, from 36 to 49. Improvement in sensory scores was likewise remarkable.

Barr reported significant improvement in his quality of life, as well as mental and physical health. He was able to walk further, faster and for a longer period of time. His range of motion for shoulder flexion and shoulder abduction also improved.

“Given the multidimensional complexity of SCI, cell-based therapies have offered substantial promise as a therapeutic strategy because of the multifactorial roles that stem cells can potentially provide,” Bydon wrote.

Bydon and his colleagues caution in generalizing from Barr’s remarkable results, although there is cause for optimism. The Mayo team plans to continue analyzing patient responses, and further results will be published on the other nine trial participants.

A. Rahman Ford, PhD, is a lawyer and research professional. He is a graduate of Rutgers University and the Howard University School of Law, where he served as Editor-in-Chief of the Howard Law Journal.

Rahman lives with chronic inflammation in his digestive tract and is unable to eat solid food. He has received stem cell treatment in China. 

This column is not intended as medical advice and represent the author’s opinions alone. It does not inherently express or reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of Pain News Network.

Stem Cell Therapy for Lower Back Pain Moves Closer

By A. Rahman Ford, PNN Columnist

There’s good news on the horizon for those who suffer from lower back pain due to disc degeneration.

Mesoblast, an Australian biotech company, has partnered with Grunenthal, a large German pharmaceutical company, to commercialize an investigational stem cell product called MPC-06-ID -- a stem cell formula comprised of mesenchymal cells derived from the bone marrow of healthy volunteers. Mesoblast could receive up to $1 billion from Grunenthal if the treatment is successful.

MPC-06-ID is currently in a Phase III placebo-controlled trial in the U.S. In the trial, millions of stem cells grown in a laboratory are injected into the patients’ degenerated discs with the goal of reducing inflammation and causing the discs to regenerate.

In previous trials, 47% of those who received the injection had a significant reduction in pain 12 months later. The results persisted for three years.

The estimated study completion date for the Phase III trial is March 2021. So, unfortunately, there is a bit of a wait. But Mesoblast is hopeful the study findings will result in FDA approval.

The company is also studying a stem cell product for chronic lower back pain. More on Mesoblast’s products and how they treat back pain can be found here.

What does this mean? First and foremost, it’s great news for people suffering from back pain. This is a population that is woefully underserved by conventional medicine. Limited options include analgesics like opioids, which are increasingly difficult to obtain, and spinal surgery that is costly, often ineffective and can even exacerbate the problem. I have previously written about these issues here.

Clinicians around the country have been using stem cell therapy (SCT) for years to treat back pain and even difficult spinal conditions like arachnoiditis. However, these clinics have been operating under the scythe of potential persecution for using products not approved by the FDA.

Not only has this placed them squarely in the crosshairs of regulatory authorities which issue warning letters and file lawsuits, but it has also subjected them to internet censorship by Google and others.

The Mesoblast-Grunenthal partnership is indicative of the fact that major corporate investment in SCT is increasing -- and that can be a great thing for consumer choice. More and more biotech investors are recognizing that SCT is the future of medicine, especially when it comes to treating conditions caused by chronic inflammation. Forbes reports that the market size of the SCT industry was $8.65 billion in 2018, with a projected annual growth rate of 8.8%.

We saw recent evidence of this trend with Bayer’s acquisition of Bluerock Therapeutics’ and its stem cell treatments for Parkinson’s disease and other chronic illnesses. And Boston-based Vertex Pharmaceuticals recently acquired Semma Therapeutics for $950 million in a bet that its SCT products could cure type 1 diabetes.

Why is the SCT market so robust? Transparency Market Research attributes it to a “rise in consumer awareness.” In other words, people are desperate for relief and looking for new treatments. Suffice it to say, any additional treatment option for those suffering from back pain is more than welcome.

A. Rahman Ford, PhD, is a lawyer and research professional. He is a graduate of Rutgers University and the Howard University School of Law, where he served as Editor-in-Chief of the Howard Law Journal.

Rahman lives with chronic inflammation in his digestive tract and is unable to eat solid food. He has received stem cell treatment in China. 

The information in this column is for informational purposes only and represent the author’s opinions alone. It does not inherently express or reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of Pain News Network.

Online Censorship of Health Information Is Authoritarianism

By A. Rahman Ford, PNN columnist

Critics of stem cell therapy have taken their censorship campaign to another frightening and paternalistic step up the authoritarian ladder. Not only does it threaten freedom of speech, freedom of association and freedom of health, but now it’s targeting poor people.

The campaign to stop people from accessing stem cell therapy (SCT) has been building for some time. First there was fearmongering to scare patients away from SCT, followed by a push to have regulatory agencies increase enforcement.  Then came a call for social media platforms like YouTube to censor patient testimonials about the benefits of SCT.

Now, in a disturbing turn, critics are pressuring fundraising platforms like GoFundMe to purge campaigns that seek to raise funds for SCT.

In a recent op/ed in the BBC’s Future, London-based neurologist Dr. Jules Montague argues that crowdfunding sites like GoFundMe need to crackdown on patients seeking to raise money for stem cell treatments. Montague says their testimonials omit the “unfounded hype” and potential risks associated with SCT. These “bad actors,” according to Montague, should be banned to “halt the spread of misinformation.”

To propose that crowdfunding sites be tasked with choosing winners and losers in the marketplace of ideas, and to impose quasi-criminal sanctions on poor patients is to enter a decidedly dictatorial dimension. “Bad actor” is a legal term of art, and should be left to the jurisdiction of a court of law or other legislatively-authorized tribunal. That’s how things work in a democracy.

On the other hand, authoritarian regimes censor whatever speech they see fit, arbitrarily and without explanation. As it pertains to crowdfunding sites, what we absolutely do not need is unelected and unappointed “experts’” selling misplaced fears.

The question that should be asked is why do the SCT critics fear the agency of the people? Is the notion that people can make their own medical decisions – and accept the risks of those decisions – without “expert” stewardship, consultation or approval such a terrifying prospect?

Ultimately, this “purge and censor” line of argument represents a slippery slope that is distinctly anti-democratic. And at the bottom of the slope, are piled the bodies of the sick, whose desperation is fueled by the abject failures of mainstream medicine.

Equally disturbing is the fact that stem cell censorship on fundraising platforms would be a clear and unmistakable attack on the poor. Poor people are the ones who need to raise money, not the wealthy. The average person doesn’t have the finances of a star athlete like Max Scherzer or a celebrity actress like Selma Blair to get stem cell treatment. Instead, they have to rely on the generosity of others, a generosity that crowdfunding sites facilitate. To censor SCT fundraising is to not only censor a voice, but a livelihood, and maybe even a life itself. Poor people should not be punished for being poor.

Does Dr. Montague really expect GoFundMe and other sites to establish their own internal ethics boards and become the online sentinels of poor people’s health? There is no defensible or rational justification for preventing chronically ill poor people from raising the money they need to save their own lives.

Online Censorship Increasing

Unfortunately, online censorship of alternative health information is not new. In fact, it’s increasing. Facebook recently deleted dozens of alternative health pages without any notice or explanation. Some, such as Natural Cures Not Medicine and Just Natural Medicine, had millions of followers.

GreenMedInfo was kicked off Pinterest for violating its “misinformation policy” which bans “false cures” for chronic illnesses. And who helps Pinterest determine what health advice is false?

“We rely on information from nationally and internationally recognized institutions, including the CDC and WHO, to help us determine if content violates these guidelines,” Pinterest explained in an email.

Recent changes to Google’s Broad Core Algorithms have also suppressed search results for alternative medical information. As a consequence, hundreds of health websites have experienced drastic drops in traffic, including Pain News Network. One website, owned by alternative health advocate Dr. Joseph Mercola, lost about 99% of its traffic.

“Big Tech has joined the movement, bringing in a global concentration of wealth to eliminate competition and critical voices,” Mercola warned. “This year, we’ve seen an unprecedented push to implement censorship across all online platforms, making it increasingly difficult to obtain and share crucial information about health topics.”

We’ve seen an unprecedented push to implement censorship across all online platforms, making it increasingly difficult to obtain and share crucial information about health topics.
— Dr. Joseph Mercola

Even Wikipedia, which relies on open source editing for its content, has succumbed to the “deletionism” of alternative health information.

“We believe that organised skeptic groups are actively targeting Wikipedia articles that promote natural, non-drug therapies with which they disagree,” says the Alliance for Natural Health. “The new trick of these editors is to rewrite or entirely remove pertinent information from such articles or, worse still, delete entire articles altogether.”

It now appears that stem cell therapy is the next hooded subject to be escorted into the Star Chamber of deletionism. The call for fundraising censorship is distinctly ant-human, and denies the most essential and primordial of human instincts – to assist a fellow human being in their time of need.

It is not the place of GoFundMe or any other fundraising site to police people’s medical choices. GoFundMe, your core principles are turning “compassion into action” and the sharing of people’s stories “far and wide.” Please do not capitulate to the SCT bullies.

A. Rahman Ford, PhD, is a lawyer and research professional. He is a graduate of Rutgers University and the Howard University School of Law, where he served as Editor-in-Chief of the Howard Law Journal. He earned his PhD at the University of Pennsylvania.

Rahman lives with chronic inflammation in his digestive tract and is unable to eat solid food. He has received stem cell treatment in China. 

The information in this column should not be considered as professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. It is for informational purposes only and represent the author’s opinions alone. It does not inherently express or reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of Pain News Network.

Stem Cell Fearmongering

By A. Rahman Ford, PNN Columnist

In a recent Canadian Medical Association Journal case report, Canadian researchers report the case of a 38-year-old man who suffered an adverse event from a very specific form of stem cell therapy – an olfactory mucosa graft.

Rather than simply present the medical particulars of the case itself, the authors proceed to make a broad indictment of stem cell therapy (SCT) as a whole. This politicization is unnecessary, irresponsible and patently unscientific.

Furthermore, it undermines the objectivity of the research itself and regrettably continues the trend of SCT fearmongering prevalent in certain mainstream publications like STAT and the Los Angeles Times, which immediately ran with the story, pushing a fear-based narrative.

In the procedure in question, nasal cells were transplanted into a spinal cord lesion that resulted from a spinal fraction that occurred when the patient was 20 years old, leaving him partially paralyzed .

He had the olfactory mucosa graft in Portugal at age 26 to potentially treat his pain and paralysis. The treatment was unsuccessful.

A dozen years later, the patient experienced deteriorating neurological function and doctors discovered a large mass on his spine “with mucinious material and tissue consistent with ectopic olfactory mucosa.”

This discovery confirmed the doctors’ preoperative diagnosis that the spinal mass was related to the stem cell procedure the patient had undergone years prior.

If the authors had stopped there, this could be considered an important contribution to the stem cell literature. Cases of adverse events from any medical procedure should be reported and taken seriously.

Unfortunately, the authors proceed much further to extrapolate wildly from their one very unique case of a very specific and experimental form of SCT. Rather than present the data and their scientific analysis, they stray into the political, diminishing the overall value of their work. Sadly, the paper reads more like an op-ed rather than objective peer-reviewed research.

The paper’s most glaring and egregious problem is that it lumps all forms of SCT together with no mention of the different types of cells, different tissues those cells come from, different methods of administration of those cells, and the differences in the clinics offering those therapies. These distinctions are critical and the authors’ failure to discuss them is troubling to say the least.  

Instead, the authors condemn the stem cell “industry” in toto, lumping cosmetic and medical procedures together, with no justification as to why the two are technically comparable, and lamenting the phantom maelstrom of SCT adverse advents that curiously has yet to materialize.

The authors then make a rather supreme leap in logic with the unsubstantiated claim that, “although some of the reported adverse events might relate to surgical technique alone, others are likely the direct result of the yet unproven treatments using stem cells.”

They provide absolutely no evidentiary basis for such a sweeping claim. If a claim cannot be supported by evidence then it should not be made. Otherwise, anyone who reads the claim might be left to make reasonable inferences about professionalism, undisclosed subjectivities and possible hidden agendas.

A. Rahman Ford, PhD, is a lawyer and research professional. He is a graduate of Rutgers University and the Howard University School of Law, where he served as Editor-in-Chief of the Howard Law Journal. He earned his PhD at the University of Pennsylvania.

Rahman lives with chronic inflammation in his digestive tract and is unable to eat solid food. He has received stem cell treatment in China. 

The information in this column should not be considered as professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. It is for informational purposes only and represent the author’s opinions alone. It does not inherently express or reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of Pain News Network.

The Push for Stem Cell Censorship Has Begun

By A. Rahman Ford, PNN Columnist

A new study published in journal Stem Cell Reports, entitled “How to Peddle Hope: An Analysis of YouTube Patient Testimonials of Unproven Stem Cell Treatments,” looks at over a hundred videos by stem cell patients posted on YouTube. 

The study appears to have an underlying anti-democratic agenda – to shame YouTube and other internet platforms into removing positive patient testimonials about stem cell therapy (SCT).  Indeed, the use of the pejorative term “peddle” in the article’s title immediately undermines the study’s credibility.

This research epitomizes how propaganda can masquerade as scientific research, and how data can be twisted to meet its masters’ agenda.

The study comes on the heels of a recent federal judge’s decision that the FDA could regulate stem cells made from adipose tissue – a patient’s own fat cells. Although SCT critics generally praised the ruling as a victory for government oversight, outlets like the Washington Post lamented that it would likely not deter clinics from offering the therapy. 

A New York Times article accused the FDA of not acting until patients were harmed, and using enforcement actions that consist only of warning letters without any real teeth.  

STAT News even criticized the National Institutes of Health for allowing stem cell clinics to “co-opt” the nation’s clinical trial database.

Stem cell critics have apparently realized that the three previous stages of their vilification campaign have failed. These stages were:

  1. Vilify the patients:  Promote the condescending narrative that patients are desperate, ignorant and too stupid to research stem cell therapy for themselves and decide whether it is best for them.

  2. Vilify the clinics: Stem cell clinics are run by shady charlatans who engage in duplicitous business practices that take advantage of desperate, ignorant and pitiful Americans by selling them “unproven” products that couldn’t possibly help them.

  3. Vilify the federal government: Federal agencies have not acted quickly or robustly enough to enforce the regulations that govern regenerative medicine, thus tacitly approving the growing “wild west” of clinics offering SCT.

The Push for YouTube Censorship

Critics now appear to be setting their sights on a fourth vilification stage.  In their desperation, they have decided to take a more authoritarian turn towards internet censorship.

The new study’s authors examined 159 YouTube testimonials from patients who had SCT for ALS, multiple sclerosis, Parkinson’s, cerebral palsy and spinal cord injury.  Not surprisingly, they found that most of the videos were published by providers and nearly all discussed the benefits of SCT in improving pain, overall health and quality of life. 

The authors concluded the YouTube testimonials “may be a potent marketing tool” and “are likely to have a wider reach and significant impact on influencing health behavior.” 

The article’s final sentence reveals the authors’ true motive: “Adopting multiple approaches, including patient education, enhancing patient treatment options, and regulatory oversight, are required to make a significant dent in reducing the number of clinics providing unproven SCTs.”

Setting aside the numerous, glaring and egregious methodological shortcomings of the study, the more important issue is one of broader public policy.  These authors appear to be implicitly advocating that YouTube and other internet sites censor videos that are “misleading” or “deceptive” or not published by “reputable organizations.” 

And who or what is to determine whether any particular video meets this criteria?  Wired published an article with the ominous headline “YouTube Testimonials Lure Patients to Shady Stem Cell Clinics,” implicitly calling on YouTube to take action. The notion isn’t farfetched. YouTube has been in the news a lot recently for censoring videos, using nebulous criteria and subjective standards.   

Apparently, SCT critics have jumped on the YouTube censorship bandwagon.  It’s a wagon that seems to claim a new victim every day, and its victims are usually those who threaten the status quo.  Unfortunately, it’s a wagon that travels the pothole-riddled road of authoritarianism.  It’s a road patrolled by people in strange uniforms, with sophisticated and articulate weapons, who dispense a vicious propaganda, and who always claim to have your best interest at heart.

Please make sure to call, email and/or tweet your state and federal legislators to voice your support for the availability and affordability of stem cell therapy.  The people who suffer with pain and disability will not be silenced and will not be censored.  Our democratic voice will be the response to their authoritarianism.

A. Rahman Ford, PhD, is a lawyer and research professional. He is a graduate of Rutgers University and the Howard University School of Law, where he served as Editor-in-Chief of the Howard Law Journal. He earned his PhD at the University of Pennsylvania.

Rahman lives with chronic inflammation in his digestive tract and is unable to eat solid food. He has received stem cell treatment in China. 

The information in this column should not be considered as professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. It is for informational purposes only and represent the author’s opinions alone. It does not inherently express or reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of Pain News Network.

Why Stem Cell Critics Are Wrong

By A. Rahman Ford, PNN Columnist

In a recent and rather lengthy New York Times article entitled “Stem Cell Treatments Flourish With Little Evidence That They Work,” authors Denise Grady and Reed Ableson do their absolute best to convince their readers that stem cell therapy (SCT) is based on strange, magical hocus-pocus, and its practitioners are all mad scientists. 

They portray stem cell clinics as shadowy castle dungeons lit only by the occasional lightning strike, and filled with glass beakers that froth with fluorescent-colored liquids.  The authors even use the phrase “unproven cell cocktails.”  That little piece of anti-SCT propaganda even scares me a little, and I’ve had SCT.

In the article, the authors trot out the same tired, empty and underhanded tropes that all articles of its ilk like to employ:

  • “no clear evidence that these treatments work”

  • “gotten way ahead of the science”

  • “no regulatory oversight”

  • “rogue clinics”

  • “scant data”

  • “not covered by insurance”

  • “high risk”  

  • “lack of solid medical evidence”

  • “snake oil”

A recent New Yorker article isn’t much different.  Both articles do contain some valid points, but those points are obscured by the scare tactics, fear-charged language and cherry-picked patient cases.

These SCT hit pieces appear from time-to-time, but rarely in publications with the broad readership of the New York Times and the New Yorker.  After reading so many of them over the years, I began to wonder – if stem cell clinics are flourishing, then isn’t that a tacit admission that the fear-mongering isn’t working? 

And if the fear-mongering isn’t working, why do they keep publishing these less-than-objective articles?  

Maybe it’s because they feel like they are part of some consumer protection vanguard to protect Americans from sleazy medical charlatans.  Or maybe it’s because the scare tactics have failed and they have no idea what else to do. 

The fact is, as I wrote in a recent PNN column, the SCT tipping point appears to have been reached. The American public simply isn’t buying what the critics are selling. As many as 1,000 stem cell clinics are now operating in the United States, according to The Washington Post, which predicts the industry is “likely to flourish” despite a judge’s ruling that upheld the FDA’s authority to regulate — and stifle — the industry.    

The Basquiat Effect

But it gets even worse for the anti-SCT purveyors. They may be suffering from what I refer to as the Basquiat Effect.  Jean-Michel Basquiat was a graffiti-inspired painter, sculptor and musician who rose to prominence in the 1980s in New York City. 

Basquiat’s work is laden with social and political commentary, with primordial figures, abstract arrangements and linguistic devices.  One of his more popular motifs was to write words and cross them out. 

Why did he do this?  As quoted from the documentary Jean-Michel Basquiat: Radiant Child, “I cross out words so you will see them more.  The fact that they are obscured makes you want to read them.”

One of Basquiat’s paintings recently sold for $110.5 million.  He was clearly on to something.

Put simply, the Basquiat Effect holds that the more one tries to hide something, the more the people they are trying to hide it from pay attention to it.  This effect becomes even more powerful after the phenomenon that is attempting to be hidden reaches it tipping point. 

Because the American public’s curiosity is already piqued, any mention of the phenomenon, regardless of context, compels the reader to look into it. The principle seems counter intuitive, but SCT critics may have provided a perfect example.  The New York Times and New Yorker articles may actually drive more people toward SCT rather than away. 

One of Basquiat’s trademark graffiti tags was “SAMO,” short for “Same Old.”  It essentially illustrated his disenchantment with the prevailing cultural orthodoxy and his intention to introduce something new, radical and revolutionary as a solution. 

In the same way, SCT is a radical response to the failures of medical orthodoxy. The “SAMO” pills and surgeries that exemplify the “treatment” approach to healthcare have given way to an expanding desire by the American people for procedures that actually “cure” chronic conditions and don’t just mask their symptoms.

The best approach for the anti-SCT purveyors may be to join a pro-cure movement that is clearly succeeding despite their efforts.  Or, they can continue to publish their criticism.  Either way, stem cell therapy will flourish.

A. Rahman Ford, PhD, is a lawyer and research professional. He is a graduate of Rutgers University and the Howard University School of Law, where he served as Editor-in-Chief of the Howard Law Journal. He earned his PhD at the University of Pennsylvania.

Rahman lives with chronic inflammation in his digestive tract and is unable to eat solid food. He has received stem cell treatment in China. 

The information in this column should not be considered as professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. It is for informational purposes only and represent the author’s opinions alone. It does not inherently express or reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of Pain News Network.

Stem Cell Therapy Can Cure Sickle Cell Disease

By A. Rahman Ford, PNN Columnist

Sickle cell disease is a debilitating illness that affects the hemoglobin in red blood cells.  The disorder causes the normally-round hemoglobin molecules to adopt an abnormal crescent or sickle shape. As a result, the patient suffers from anemia, repeated infections and periodic episodes of pain. 

According to the National Institutes of Health, sickle cell disease affects millions of people worldwide and is the most commonly inherited disorder in the U.S.  It affects approximately 70,000 – 80,000 Americans.  Blacks and Latinos are hit especially hard, with 1 in 500 and 1 in 1,000 being affected, respectively.

Pain is a major symptom of sickle cell disorder.  According to the Mayo Clinic, the pain develops when the sickle-shaped red blood cells block blood flow to the tiny blood vessels in your chest, abdomen and joints.  Pain in the bones can also occur.  Pain crises may last from hours to weeks and may require hospitalization.  According to mainstream medicine, there is no cure.  The only option is symptom management.

However, stem cell therapy (SCT) has brought new hope. Recently, it was reported that 11-year-old Valeria Vargas-Olmedo was cured of painful sickle cell disease.

That’s right. Cured.

In its first stem cell transplant for sickle cell disease, doctors at Loma Linda Children’s University Hospital in California used a stem cell transplant from Valeria’s father to cure the disease. This is noteworthy because the genetic match was only half – what is called haploidentical transplant. 

VALERIA VARGAS-OLMEDO AND HER PARENTS

Prior to treatment, Valeria could not walk, go to school and experienced debilitating chronic pain. After conditioning with chemotherapy, the father’s cells were transfused directly into his daughter. After the treatment, Dr. Akshat Jain pronounced young Valeria “disease free.” 

The University of Illinois Hospital also offers SCT for sickle cell disease.  Using cells from a healthy, tissue-matched full sibling, patients receive immunosuppressive drugs and very low dose radiation before being infused with the cells. This method is less harsh and has fewer side effects than chemotherapy. The donor blood cells produce healthy new blood cells in the patient, eliminating symptoms and making the disease undetectable. 

In 2011, Iesha Thomas was the first patient to receive SCT for sickle cell disease at UI Health.  Six months later, she was cured.

Brothers Julius and Desmond Means were cured the following year.  In this video, Julius says having sickle cell disease as a young child was “like being tortured from the inside out.”


Saint Louis Children’s Hospital offers a similar therapy and uses cells from bone marrow, circulating blood or donated umbilical cord blood.

Unfortunately, not every hospital offers SCT for sickle cell disease.  However, if you are suffering from the illness it might be a good idea to contact a hospital that does, make an appointment with an experienced physician, and see what your options are. 

It is extraordinarily rare that mainstream medicine uses the term “cure” in association with any chronic disease.  Stem cell therapy has ushered in a new cure-based paradigm of medicine.  We need to take advantage of it.

A. Rahman Ford, PhD, is a lawyer and research professional. He is a graduate of Rutgers University and the Howard University School of Law, where he served as Editor-in-Chief of the Howard Law Journal. He earned his PhD at the University of Pennsylvania.

Rahman lives with chronic inflammation in his digestive tract and is unable to eat solid food. He has received stem cell treatment in China. 

The information in this column should not be considered as professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. It is for informational purposes only and represent the author’s opinions alone. It does not inherently express or reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of Pain News Network.

Have We Reached the Stem Cell Tipping Point?

By A. Rahman Ford, PNN Columnist

One morning while watching TV, I was astonished by one of the commercials that ran.  It was an ad for stem cell therapy.  That was when it dawned on me – stem cells had finally hit the mainstream.  It was no longer a procedure of myth and mystery that people saw as strange or taboo.  It was now real, obtainable and, dare I say, normal. 

The public discourse over the legitimacy of stem cell therapy (SCT) has taken a clear turn in recent years, away from fearmongering and misrepresentation, and toward medical innovation and less restrictive federal regulation. 

Stem cell therapy may have officially reached its tipping point.

The term “tipping point” was popularized by Malcolm Gladwell.  He describes it as “that one dramatic moment in an epidemic when everything can change all at once.”  For Gladwell, certain large-scale social phenomena – which he terms “epidemics” or “contagions” – take hold through small, incremental changes that tend to happen in a hurry.  

Gladwell asserts that, like medical epidemics, “tipping point” social epidemics obey three laws:

  1. Law of the Few: They are driven by a handful of people

  2. Stickiness Factor: At a certain point a message “sticks” in the memory

  3. Power of Context: Human beings are sensitive to their environment 

Three groups of people facilitate successful social epidemics:

  1. Mavens, who possess the specific information or knowledge

  2. Connectors, who bring people together and disseminate that information

  3. Salesmen, who persuade others to believe the information. 

It’s ironic that Gladwell uses examples of medical epidemics to describe a theory that could be applied to a modality with the curative power of SCT. The increasing and diverse number of patient testimonials online shows how SCT has reached its tipping point.

Roar Africa CEO Deborah Calmeyer used her own stem cells to repair a bone chip on a toe she injured falling down a flight of stairs at a Manhattan restaurant.  After two years, her pain was gone and the cartilage completely healed. 

Grandmother Andrea Coleman of Charlotte, NC used her own stem cells to heal her arthritis pain, pain which she described as “10+.”  Less than two months after the therapy, her pain was at a “2 or a 3.”  And how did she find the clinic?  Her husband did a simple online search.

High school wrestlers like JD Peralta of small-town Clovis, California used SCT to heal a torn ACL and meniscus. 

South Florida mother Marty Kelly credits SCT with curing her non-verbal autistic son Kenneth.  At eight years old, Kenneth couldn’t talk or reread and was still in diapers. Now, after nine treatments, 17-year-old Kenneth is about to graduate high school.  How did Marty Kelley find out about SCT?  She “stumbled” across a little boy in Orlando who also benefitted from the therapy. 

Finally, Superman actor Dean Cain used SCT to heal chronic pain from a knee injury he suffered playing college football.  He even invited DailyMailTV cameras to record the procedure.  Cain also credits SCT with controlling his father’s Parkinson’s Disease. 

When Superman becomes an SCT connector and salesman, you know you’ve reached the tipping point.

Small Clinics and Large Hospitals Tip the Scales

More and more clinics are offering SCT.  This proliferation is occurring despite the restrictive FDA regulatory regime that dictates stem cells should be “minimally manipulated” and only for approved treatments. Clearly, the medical professionals are not overly concerned with FDA policing and investigation. This is similar to marijuana which, while still illegal under federal law, is legally sold in dispensaries in dozens of states without fear of a crackdown.  

This perception that the FDA has adopted a permissive, laissez-faire stance is telling and evidences another SCT tipping point.

Not only is the number of small clinics increasing, but the availability of SCT in large, mainstream hospitals is further evidence of a tipping point.  As Liz Szabo points out in Kaiser Health News, major hospitals like the Swedish Medical Center – Seattle’s largest non-profit health provider – have begun offering SCT with infomercial-like advertisements.  The Mayo Clinic, Cleveland Clinic and the University of Miami have also entered the field to provide options to patients who have exhausted mainstream remedies. 

“We have patients in our offices demanding these treatments,” said Dr. Shane Shapiro of the Mayo Clinic. “If they don’t get them from us, they will get them somewhere else.”

A serious argument can be made that the SCT tipping point has indeed been reached.  Gladwell’s theory fits the SCT movement well.  Although the SCT movement’s initial push was driven by the few, as Gladwell conceptualized, it is the stories of the many that drive it now. 

Context has also been important. The pain and suffering of countless Americans has provided the context that has forced more clinics and hospitals to provide SCT.  And progress has been quick. Just nine years ago I had to go all the way to China for my SCT.

A. Rahman Ford, PhD, is a lawyer and research professional. He is a graduate of Rutgers University and the Howard University School of Law, where he served as Editor-in-Chief of the Howard Law Journal. Rahman earned his PhD at the University of Pennsylvania.

Rahman lives with chronic inflammation in his digestive tract and is unable to eat solid food.

The information in this column should not be considered as professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. It is for informational purposes only and represent the author’s opinions alone. It does not inherently express or reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of Pain News Network.