Page 1 of 1
CCSVI vs fetal stem cells
Posted: Sun Jun 20, 2010 8:28 pm
by joanp
it is interesting to read of improvements to people who had fetal stem cell treatment. we know it will take a long time to figure all this out but i think that ccsvi is just one piece of the puzzle.
http://www.medra.com/multiplesclerosis1 ... gwodWHG7Qg[/url]
Posted: Mon Jun 21, 2010 12:17 am
by sbr487
Sorry to say but I think stem cell treatment is just another method to immune suppressants since they erase memory of our immune system. Not to mention you also lose the immunity you might have developed over years (through vaccination and infections). There seems to be some more advanced versions to the stem cell but I am not sure how they work ...
But I must say, I would be the happiest person if this works. Stem cell every 2-3 years. Why not?
Posted: Mon Jun 21, 2010 5:20 am
by belsadie
Had FSC infusion 2 1/2 yrs ago [Medra}and $30,000 later and.. Nothing, no improvement, In fact I'm progressing. I just e-mailed Dr. Rader who returned with an apology and offer to treat me with a "new method" for free.
I replied with a request for more info.. Will keep u posted
Posted: Mon Jun 21, 2010 6:12 am
by drbart
belsadie wrote:Had FSC infusion 2 1/2 yrs ago [Medra}and $30,000 later and.. Nothing, no improvement, In fact I'm progressing. I just e-mailed Dr. Rader who returned with an apology and offer to treat me with a "new method" for free.
I replied with a request for more info.. Will keep u posted
i've talked with one stem cell reciptient (costa rica) who claims to have seen improvement for 6-9 months.
i wonder if someone will try this post-ccsvi to see if the treatments take.
Posted: Mon Jun 21, 2010 6:42 am
by tzootsi
From what I've been reading, stem cell treatment has helped a few people, but not the majority. You can read some accounts at msworld.org/forums. CCSVI seems to be a safer, more effective, and more inexpensive option. Maybe in the future stem cells along with CCSVI will be the way to go.