Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 43

Thread: Something to look into, but be very sceptical...

  1. #21
    What if company as Thorne Medical decide to accelerate research and application of animal model proven effect of Ch'ase enzime on humans or even to speed up PTEN application? Things can go in wrong directions, true, but prospect of making millions for them with correct product should be powerfull enough to tweak things carefully but much faster than some university based labs with very slow motion research projects.
    www.MiracleofWalk.com

    Miracles are not contrary to nature, but only contrary
    to what we know about nature
    Saint Augustine

  2. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by comad View Post
    What if company as Thorne Medical decide to accelerate research and application of animal model proven effect of Ch'ase enzime on humans or even to speed up PTEN application? Things can go in wrong directions, true, but prospect of making millions for them with correct product should be powerfull enough to tweak things carefully but much faster than some university based labs with very slow motion research projects.
    Should they charge for experimentation on people without any data from large animal studies being completed so they can potentially make millions of dollars?

  3. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by GRAMMY View Post
    Should they charge for experimentation on people without any data from large animal studies being completed so they can potentially make millions of dollars?
    There are plenty of companies already making money from doing exactly this in asia. The problem is that people have no real idea of what they are actually doing, they could be injecting water and no one would know.

    What would be more interesting is if there was a company that would do pre-trial or trial stage treatments on people who wanted to take the risk. The treatments that have been shown to work and have been peer reviewed, even at very initial stages.
    As Comad mentions what about Ch'ase, stimulation stuff or cells that have been shown to have a little improvement.

    I know its not for everyone, but I would pay a company with an element of trust to do these things.

  4. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by niallel View Post
    There are plenty of companies already making money from doing exactly this in asia. The problem is that people have no real idea of what they are actually doing, they could be injecting water and no one would know.

    What would be more interesting is if there was a company that would do pre-trial or trial stage treatments on people who wanted to take the risk. The treatments that have been shown to work and have been peer reviewed, even at very initial stages.
    As Comad mentions what about Ch'ase, stimulation stuff or cells that have been shown to have a little improvement.
    What worked in a petri dish, fish, elegan or a mouse study in a lab should be used on people wanting to pay for concoctions just because they were published in a science journal? (I thought this was one of the reasons the community has had an extraordinary large amount of failed clinical trials and new clinical trial protocol standards had to be set up).

    What would give you more trust in such an overseas company? Would it be a money back guarantee if you got sick and died, flashier internet advertising that attracted more willing customers, or more company employed patients giving the public testimonials? Why would scientists agree to turn their work over to such a company doing human experiments when they do not want people harmed but instead hope to help?

  5. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by GRAMMY View Post
    What worked in a petri dish, fish, elegan or a mouse study in a lab should be used on people wanting to pay for concoctions just because they were published in a science journal? (I thought this was one of the reasons the community has had an extraordinary large amount of failed clinical trials and new clinical trial protocol standards had to be set up).
    I never meant about stuff that hadn't been through safety testing (ignore the chase bit), I was talking about stuff that had been done on humans - like I said "stimulation stuff or cells that have been shown to have a little improvement."
    Things that have had the stage 1 safety testing done.

    Quote Originally Posted by GRAMMY View Post
    What would give you more trust in such an overseas company? Would it be a money back guarantee if you got sick and died, flashier internet advertising that attracted more willing customers, or more company employed patients giving the public testimonials?
    Seriously, no need to try and make out I'm stupid. I'm talking about a company that is regulated in their environment delivering a treatment that has been through safety testing, not someone injecting something that could be anything with no safety done on it.

    Quote Originally Posted by GRAMMY View Post
    Why would scientists agree to turn their work over to such a company doing human experiments when they do not want people harmed but instead hope to help?
    Human Experiments? Isn't that what the scientists actually do?
    If a scientist has done a trial, gone through safety and seen some improvement then this isn't a freak show experiment. Its what they would be moving to stage 2 or 3 themselves.

    Why would the scientists do it?
    - It would get more people trying what they were doing.
    - It would let people who were desperate try something before having to wait the never ending 5-10 years.
    - They could license it so they make more money for their trials.

  6. #26
    [QUOTE=niallel;1808234]I never meant about stuff that hadn't been through safety testing (ignore the chase bit), I was talking about stuff that had been done on humans - like I said "stimulation stuff or cells that have been shown to have a little improvement." Things that have had the stage 1 safety testing done. I'm talking about a company that is regulated in their environment delivering a treatment that has been through safety testing, not someone injecting something that could be anything with no safety done on it.[QUOTE]

    You said "The treatments that have been shown to work and have been peer reviewed, even at very initial stages". I thought you were talking about lab experiments rather than a product that had already been through one completed FDA approved safety clinical trial. Lumping Chondroitinase in, (which hasn't been in any level of SCI safety trial) made me think that was the lab category of experiments you were talking about.

    [QUOTE=niallel;1808234]I'm talking about a company that is regulated in their environment delivering a treatment that has been through safety testing, not someone injecting something that could be anything with no safety done on it.[QUOTE]

    Most companies have shareholders or owners with a huge amount of money invested into their company. By law yet, no company can begin injecting things into humans and charging for something that made it simply through a Stage 1 safety trial that didn't result in death for a handful of people. Citizens are the ones putting extreme heat on the FDA to not let anything out to the clinic to purchase that may be harmful. We live in a very risk adverse society that has absolutely no tolerance for any oops (no matter how big or small). Once a patient files a harm lawsuit, the company no longer exists because there is no legal protection for them and they file bankruptcy.


    Quote Originally Posted by niallel View Post
    Human Experiments? Isn't that what the scientists actually do?
    If a scientist has done a trial, gone through safety and seen some improvement then this isn't a freak show experiment. Its what they would be moving to stage 2 or 3 themselves. Why would the scientists do it?
    - It would get more people trying what they were doing.
    - It would let people who were desperate try something before having to wait the never ending 5-10 years.
    - They could license it so they make more money for their trials.
    No, actually scientists working at the bench (especially ones without human medical degrees) aren't doing the human trials. The technology is purchased by a biotech company with very deep pockets that can work the product through the various levels of FDA trials with their own qualified personnel. Bench scientists have little to no expertise in the aspects of product translation or company building to put the product on the market. They license the product via a translation department that sells the interest to a biotech company with funds. Most scientists do not have the wealth or expertise to translate.

    Perhaps translation could be more relaxed in the UK where you are from. Here in the US, injecting people with an item that went through only one low dose phase with a couple people and then charging citizens for it is against the law. A phase 1 safety trial doesn't really show anything about the product actually working (efficacy) like the later phases of testing. It's like playing Russian roulette with people's lives and not many companies would like taking that risk with their money.
    Last edited by GRAMMY; 08-16-2016 at 12:05 PM.

  7. #27
    There are a bunch of US labs already injecting stem cells. Previously I saw an application photos that would work for pressure sores, but could not google it up again. However this EU did.
    http://www.startstemcells.com/diabet...treatment.html
    I have had periodic paralysis all my life. I lost my ability to walk in 2011 beginning with a spinal block, which was used for a hip fracture caused by periodic paralysis.

  8. #28
    I'm going to ignore your suggestion that the UK might not care about safety as much as the US, Let me put it as simple as I can what I was suggesting.

    What I am suggesting is that it would be nice if trials that have shown to be safe and to have given something back could be taken by people who have made a decision themselves to have it.

    Two examples:
    1) Wise's trial has shown to be safe and gives benefits.
    2) Harkema's epidural stimulation has shown to be safe and gives benefits.

    Why should we sit in our chairs and suffer for 10 years in hope when there seems to be an alternative.

    If there was a company who did exactly what these 2 have done, I don't care where its located, but if they followed exactly what has been done then I would go tomorrow. Sign whatever legal documents they wanted to cover themselves and get on with it. It should be our choice, just like Dallas Buyers Club.

  9. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by niallel View Post
    What I am suggesting is that it would be nice if trials that have shown to be safe and to have given something back could be taken by people who have made a decision themselves to have it.

    Two examples:

    1) Wise's trial has shown to be safe and gives benefits.
    2) Harkema's epidural stimulation has shown to be safe and gives benefits.

    Why should we sit in our chairs and suffer for 10 years in hope when there seems to be an alternative.

    If there was a company who did exactly what these 2 have done, I don't care where its located, but if they followed exactly what has been done then I would go tomorrow. Sign whatever legal documents they wanted to cover themselves and get on with it. It should be our choice, just like Dallas Buyers Club.
    Niallel, when our Phase IIb trial is approved by the US FDA, it will be eligible for Expanded Compassionate Use. As soon as the patients are selected for the trial, the therapy will be available, and the cells will be provided by StemCyte at cost.

  10. #30
    Hi Jim,

    Thats brilliant, exactly the kind of thing I was looking for.

    Are any companies (health care providers) looking at delivering this? I know its not approved yet, but has anyone shown initial interest?

Similar Threads

  1. Sceptical of making a change.
    By xtravla in forum Pain
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 07-13-2012, 02:01 PM
  2. Some are sceptical to a cure
    By Leif in forum Cure
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 11-02-2006, 10:32 AM
  3. Some are sceptical to a cure
    By Leif in forum Cure
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 05-25-2006, 01:19 PM
  4. Replies: 7
    Last Post: 11-21-2005, 06:06 AM
  5. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 08-30-2001, 07:28 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •