DaVinciCentre wrote:
Dangle, To clarify on treatment types:
PRP - As you mentioned, a simple injection of your own previously extracted cells into a specific site.
Benefit: Most cost effective, however significantly less cells injected (~5 million) reducing treatment effectiveness. Very popular in US, and requires little to no set up or training. Many clinics only offer this form of therapy for these reasons.
Adipose Derived - Your own cells, extracted via micro-liposuction, sent to the US Lab (which is FDA regulated) to be cultured an multiplied over 30-45 days. The only ingredients added to the patient's cells are in the form of the cell media used to grow the culture, no "performance enhancing" additives or deregulated substances.
Benefit: Extracted cells (~5 million) multiplied to roughly 1 billion cells, vastly increasing treatment effectiveness.
Allogeneic Derived - Stem cells drawn from human cord blood donations or "Wharton's Jelly". This type has been recently shown in studies to be the most effective form of stem cell treatment, and is currently being tested for use in over 80 different diseases and disorders.
Benefit: Readily available with no need for any form of extraction from patient, no waiting period for cell culture.
Hope this helps expand upon the basic principles and benefits of each therapy type.
DVC
I understand what you're saying and am familiar with a lot of this from my daytime gig. Your clarification and explanations are well written and have a kind tone to them. Thank you.
I would like to note that your definitions of 'adipose derived' and 'allogeneic derived' apply to Da Vinci's claimed services and not stem cell therapy in general. Shipping somebody's cells across an ocean for a lab to work with and send back for a future injection is way different than what's allowed in the USA. It's known in the stem cell world that your Cayman Island neighbors are adding growth factors and other compounds into their injections. Bovines were also used as the allogeneic sources in at least one instance.
Even if Da Vinci is head and shoulders above the rest, they are still offering techniques not allowed in the USA. I stand by my statement that I have little doubt that USADA would say "no" if asked if these specific stem cell treatments would be allowed under their rules. It's an area where the knowledge based and pace of technology really made it hard for a group like USADA to make a blanket statement about. If I'm correct in that guess, I don't think the ST forums are an appropriate place to advertise these treatments. If I'm wrong, then I'll quietly exit the room. Your wit is certainly welcome here though.