Jonhark, from your previous post history, I picked up that one of your ACIs failed. Is this not so? And I picked up from previous posts, that you both had the same Dr. Perhaps I was mistaken, but your posts seemed to indicate it. At the very least, I am sure that both of you have expressed disappointment over having failed ACIs.
And Jon, I am perfectly willing to report my successes or failures here, with regards to Regenexx. That was the point of opening this thread.. you know, the one which you decided to visit for some odd reason(s).
Mark, I was not an “advocate” of mfx before I had it, I was indifferent based on what I had read. I did it because statistics show it has worked for a subset of those with small lesions. Initially, my lesion was small on the MRI, but when the Dr went in, it ended up being much larger due to cartilage flaking off the periphery of the lesion easily upon debridement. So at that point (and I remember this since I was conscious for the surgery and observing a monitor), what was I supposed to do? I took a chance with it, and it didn't quite work. No fault of the surgeons, or the team of health care professionals (i.e. PTs and nurses) who were involved.
Mark, you say the "burden of proof" lies with me? I provided at least one link to the Regenexx site with case studies and explanations of the procedure. It's not just for show either.. they discuss the science and statistics. If you don't want to take the time to look, then there is no point in arguing with you, because, you choose ignorance and obtusity.
You say that having a science background doesn't mean I am "the foremost" authority? Honestly, any impartial observer would look at that statement and laugh. It’s akin to Homer Simpson walking up to Susskind and telling him, “Just because you have a background in theoretical psychics.. err I mean physics and err.. umm.. that stringie theoree, doesn’t mean you can tell me how the universe started!” (Doh!) Nice strawman there.. but the fact is that I do understand what is likely going on at the cellular (and molecular) level, with respect to this procedure. So yes, unless you have a similar background and/or understanding, then I am far more of an "authority" than you or Jon.
Rob, understand that it may take multiple injections for some. I was graded in the “fair” category by Dr. Schultz in part, due to my previous mfx surgery. I cannot be sure, but it’s possible that I would be in the “good” category if I had no prior mfx history. So if you, or anyone else has had multiple invasive procedures done to the knee, that would be ONE factor in determining how well Regenexx-SD would work, IMO.
One final question to Mark and Jon: Why are you here, in this thread? You don’t believe in the procedure, then tell us why? There are case studies and hard-core papers in reputable scientific journals to support this modality of treatment.
Ignorance is one thing, but deliberate ignorance coupled with verbalization off flawed opinion is dangerous. There are people here that are caught between a “rock and a hard place”. I personally know two such people, who have had invasive surgeries (knee and spine respectively) only to experience failure. They are scared. Their doctors have “politely” abandoned them, saying there is nothing more that can surgically be done. Stem cell treatments such as that employed by Regenexx are the future, and may be helpful in their CURRENT form.
Mark and Jon, here is one basic paper explaining MSC therapy, with a case study included in it. Some of the jargon may be foreign to you, but I would be happy to answer questions.
Follow this link: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18786777
Click on the "Elsevier full text" radio button in the top right, and then proceed to download the pdf file (it's free).