I only said I skipped that part because I thought we had the same information and couldn’t believe that I missed that part. Only to go back over the information I had and realized it wasn’t there. Then, have you call me a liar. Which is a term more fitting for you. As I posted my information and you can clearly see it isn’t there.
Then let the public decide if they want this therapy regardless if the conclusions say more studies are needed. Opioids kill people everyday and where is the outcry of more studies?
Do you get to decide the treatment the public wants to receive? Cause pharma does. As there business model is disease as a profit center. Is this what you equate to a democracy, you hypocrite.
if YOU WANT TO SEE SOME VIDEO TESTIMONIALS click on the link below OR facts on adult stem cell transplants. Do the same with the other link.
More on MS. Caplan AI. Adult mesenchymal stem cells for tissue engineering versus regenerative medicine. J Cell Physiol. 2007;213(2):341-347.
Chamberlin G. Fox J. Ashton B. Middleton J. Concise review: mesenchymal stem cells: their phenotype, differentiation capacity, immunological features, and potential for homing. Stem cells 2007;25(11):2739-2749.
You gotta stop twisting words and trying to deflect from what you did because I can easily copy and paste everything I wrote.
I said YOU don’t believe in democracy despite all your moral posturing. You are hiding behind the usual bullshit of “speaking for the public” when you are really doing everything for yourself.
It’s been answered at least 100 times. Because there’s no verifiable/reproducable proof that says they work in humans. Once you get that proof, you can write your own ticket to prosperity and untold riches.
Not to mention under a UHC/Single-payer they’re still not going to be a choice for the public because the same people running the FDA today would be running the FDA under single-payer.
If you support single-payer you support limiting people’s choice in care, period.
Just another Zep inconsistency of which there are easily a thousand.
This is not a logical question, Zep; it’s a rhetorical sleight of hand. You’re using the term “choice” to invoke our ethical sense of the good of freedom–the government’s job is to protect freedom (choice), so you try to make us feel bad that the government is now limiting freedom (choice). The problem is that you are using “choice” to mean “unlimitedly accessible to everyone regardless of means.” The assumption of your question is a socialist view of the government’s role. That’s why your question is unanswerable, because you are starting from a faulty assumption. It’s the same ridiculous assumption and rhetorical sleight of hand used to make tax-payer-funded abortion legal in the state of Illinois recently.
You are free, Zep, and you do have a choice. You are free to earn money (work or crowdfunding) to go to Panama and get your treatment. You are not entitled to other people paying for it for you. Period. This isn’t about our brainwashing or ideology. This is literally basic human reasoning - I want my resources invested where I have the highest chance of return. Since taxes are in part money taken from me, I want them used on things that are going to work. Since stem cells have not been proven effective, I don’t want my money invested there, regardless of how many people claimed to be helped by them.
Peter Popov is televangelist who promises miracles of healing for money. Thousands of people have given him funds, and some people walk away from his meetings claiming that they were helped by him. Yet Popov was shown to have no more success than a placebo effect under rigorous testing standards in the 1980s, but that did not stop people from going to his meetings and giving him money and claiming they received benefit. Should tax payers have to subsidize your trip to one of his meetings and contribution to his “ministry” because you hold on to the dream that he might miraculously help you? It’s the exact same case with stem cells - no real evidence they are more successful in treating chronic or degenerative diseases than the claims of desperate people (like you). Why then should other people have to pay for it?
They are in bed with the government to make money and consolidate power. This is why a friend of a friend who has MS gets his 5k a month medication(Copaxone) paid for by government. It does nothing for him as his blind spot in his eye continues to grow. Eventually he will be forced to try and live off the scraps given to him by Disability. As a long haul trucker it is only a matter of time before he is forced out due to his illness. Why let him get stem cell therapy? It could reverse his blind spot, allowing him to continue working, all the while costing about 1/3 of his yearly medication and keeping him from collecting Disability. Sounds awful to me. I’d bet you’d like paying for a medication that doesn’t work but fills the pockets of pharma.
And if living the life of a zombie is a choice I have.
Just 60k of people get it every year because it doesn’t work.
No it hasn’t been answered. People still ought to have the freedom of choice to have whatever treatment they choose. This is exactly what pharma doesn’t want public choice, because it will take money from their bottom line. And after all it isn’t about helping people it’s about making money.
In addition there is plenty of proof that opioids kill but that is a choice. Why, because it is garbage produced by pharma and they can make another buck.
So why the discrepancy?
Human umbilical cord stem cells given to mice and it still worked.
No, there is no evidence.
Our data demonstrated a high potential for hUC-MSC treatment of MS.
But no choice. Oh you can take opioids which may kill you but stem cells, forget it.