US Stem Cell Inc (USRM)

[Dragon Lady]

Another "study" with, what appears, to be another "doctor's office"? Wow. Not a university or similar "research department or team" or a group with formal "medical research/trials/publication" experience, but a "doctor" in their own practice/office?

But phase II/III trials of Myocell go nowhere and it's a 2 cent stock again?

And the "doctor's office" web site, IMO, touts many things as being "treated" using "stem cells"? Yet, the FDA clearly stated they have "approved" ONE "treatment" in the U.S. for "stem cell" anything, as far as I am aware? Per the FDA site, unless any "stem cell anything" is being done under an FDA, strict "research/study approved protocol", following strict, FDA oversight "research/study" rules and protocols, then it can't be "offered" on U.S. soil per my understanding of reading the FDA web site "warnings to consumers" and similar "updates" regarding "stem cells":
http://www.fda.gov/forconsumers/consumerupdates/ucm286155.htm

There is a huge difference IMO, between saying something is being "studied/researched", and using words/claims that it "treats/CURES" any particular malady.

This also looks like another PAID FOR BY THE PATIENT type "study", so what does BHRT "sponsoring" it, actually mean? (a google search revealed testimonial that this particular doctor did a stem cell "knee" procedure for a golfer, as $8,500 a knee. That would be cash, one would assume, as no insurance that I'm aware of would pt for an "experimental", non FDA approved "procedure" typically, IMO)
"This patient-funded study will track the improvement and delayed progression of MS symptoms. "
http://thrivemdvail.com/stem-cell-treatment-multiple-sclerosis/

It appears that the "practice" of "thrivemd" was only opened/started about 1.5 yrs ago:
http://www.redorbit.com/news/health/1112753769/leading-expert-opens-thrivemd-a-regenerative-medical-practice-in-edwards/

A "study" means it would, by historical standards, ONLY be about 10 yrs, maybe more to a U.S. based FDA approval- and what would BHRT ever fund that with? They can't even fund/advance the actual, FDA level phase II/III "trials" they "had", past tense, that stalled out and have now gone nowhere for going on about 5 years now.

So, while the phase II/III "Myocell", past, formal "trials" have not advanced in years now, they are doing "studies" or "something" related to a long "wash list" of maladies from now, "ED" to "eye" related stuff to "orthopedic" to now "MS" to "degenerative disc" to "COPD" to "animal" related illnesses, etc? Wow. It might not be long, before they have some kind of "study" to cover pretty much every serious malady known to man, perhaps? All with a staff of 4 full time, and one part time and almost no money and all while supposedly working on FDA phase II/III "trials" (plural/multiple) too, with one person as "Chief Science Office"? Wow, IMO.

I could have checked the calendar and said it was time for a PR about "something" any day now, IMO.

Of course, IMO, the "PR" is "vague". "ThriveMD is about to start a BioHeart-sponsored study". What does "about to start" mean? When? Why would it be hard to list thee date? And "BHRT sponsored"? What does that mean? They are paying money in some form? It already states it's "PATIENT FUNDED"? What exactly is BHRT's role as "sponsor" to a "study" mean or amount to? Details are not hard to provide IMO. I can go to clinicaltrials.gov, or read "PR", for example, from Baxter (just as an example) and everything "in detail" is specifically listed. Who, where, how long, expected outcomes, money involved usually (I'm not aware of them EVER charging a fee/cost to a "study/trial" participant, to the contrary, they typically compensate their study/trial participants that I am aware of), exact locations of each "study center", number of patients involved, etc.

Not impressed at all. Just more of the same old, IMO. A PR about a "study" at a place, when one reads the web site carefully, appears to be, basically, a single doctor's "practice" in a "suite" and a web site in which the use of "regenerative" and "restorative" and "stem cell therapy" and other words are used a lot, IMO. None of which are "generally accepted", FDA approved or peer reviewed or insurance or similar covered "procedures" that I am aware of, inside the U.S.?

A google search revealed no PUBMED or similar peer review or other "journal" publications in which this doctor's name appears to come up that I could find. It does reveal a lot of "PR" type material and "appearances" on things like a local radio show perhaps or a "blog" or "talk" to some "group" and things like "articles" in local "newspapers" or or similar "PR releases" being referenced that I found.

The name of the physician also appeared here, in the a Colorado.gov publication "The Newsletter of the Colorado Board of Medical Examiners ,Volume 15, Number 1 ,May 2007" under "medical board actions" section, for something in 2006. It appears to be the same physician as he lists himself as a "paint mgt" doc on his web site, and the address in the gov publication is "Greenwood Colorado". That's all I could find.
http://cdn.colorado.gov/cs/Satellite?blobcol=urldata&blobheadername1=Content-Disposition&blobheadername2=Content-Type&blobheadervalue1=inline%3B+filename%3D%222007+Physician+Newsletter.pdf%22&blobheadervalue2=application%2Fpdf&blobkey=id&blobtable=MungoBlobs&blobwhere=1251832194839&ssbinary=true

The same physician appears to be listed her also under "board actions" (just public available info that popped right up on a simple google search)
http://www.mbc.ca.gov/publications/newsletters/action_report_2006_07.pdf

That first publication links here, to the Colorado medical board's web site- and the doctor's name comes up here, looks like 4 times it appears:
https://doraimage.state.co.us/LibertyIMS::/sid989dz9U5aYjzRGd9/Cmd%3D%24%2444F6ApAb_WkbD35Xs%3Bej3X%3D%23Aoh

That's all I could really find via using Google to look for details about publications, this "practice" called "Thrive.md", etc