Contact Us

This site is produced by the Knoepfler Lab at UC Davis School of Medicine in Sacramento, CA. The posts are primarily written by Dr. Paul Knoepfler who can be reached at [email protected]

Find out all about us and our research here.

57 thoughts on “Contact Us


  1. Hello, I apologies that I have no questions or comments about your website, I just have some personal questions for you. I would like not to give out any of my personal information, (i.e my full name) if that is acceptable ,thank you so much! My friend, I am sending you this message because I have good news to tell you about and I would like to ask you some very important questions, questions that we all must ask ourselves about where we will spend eternity. We all know that one day we will die and the Bible says in John 3:3b “Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.” The question you must ask yourself is am I saved from my sins? Do I know what it means to have my sins forgiven and be on my way to Heaven? Do I know Who Jesus Christ is? Do I know what He did for me on the Cross? The Bible says you can know all of these questions. All you have to do is trust Jesus Christ as Saviour to save you from your sins and the Bible says in Romans 10:13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. Please read The Bible, the New Testament book of Romans, for more information about knowing for sure that you are on your way heaven! If you would like additional information or have specific questions, please e-mail me and I would be happy to tell you more! Remember, Jesus loves you very much! All life is about is to Love, obey, worship and glorify God.

    May God bless you!


  2. Some people are so programmed, thinking outside the box is like suicide. They’re to scared to use their brains and read between the lines. Even God gives us a choice, John 3:16. The way we choose to live our lives is between the Creator and that person, so go pray for humility and mind your business.


  3. Paul,
    I would like your opinion on something. You have followed ACTC for quite some time now. Recently, Pfizer and the College of London announced that they are going to begin trials for their sheet/cell combination. This is the process that was created I believe by Coffey before he left for UCSB. This trial has been anticipated for some time, but the actual filing is for WET AMD rather than the dry form which most everyone else anticipated that they would go after.
    Do you have any ideas or clues as to why they would focus on the WET form of the disease when the majority by far of the cases are in dry amd?
    What am I missing?
    Your opinion is appreciated.


  4. Hi Rollin,
    Great question. I wish I had a great answer. Is there something about the sheet/cell combo that would be predicted to work better for WET AMD? That’s the only thing that comes to mind. Other readers have thoughts?


  5. It’s my understanding that the doctor doing the face lift that resulted in bone growing,injected something else around her eyes which resulted in the reaction of growing bone.
    Of course the Luddites and media had a hayday poo pooing this revolution in medicine.Even you,a proponent,have repeated this ,what I consider mis-information,and it’s obvious the doctor himself screwed up by not even considering what might occur mixing these products with stem cells.
    The FDA and especially the NIH seem in no hurry to bring these amazing cells to the millions of suffering human that need them.If NASA had to deal with the FDA and the evangelical in charge at the NIH, we would still be anticipating a moon landing in the not too distant future.
    Many patients are in life or death situations and in my opinion should be able to insist on these amazing advancements in medicine.They should be able to decide if they want to accept the risks since they many will die anyway without them.
    It’s really the same question as will we use embryos heading to the trash heap to help suffering living humans or let the Luddites win the day.


  6. Hi Dr Knoepfler,

    I have a case that I would like your input on.
    On Saturday, 2 march, 22 yr old male was med evac’d from Zambia to Johannesburg after collapsing on site. Diagnosed with cerebral malaria that was not picked up in numerous malaria tests in the weeks preceding the incident.
    Patient is currently in a coma and on life support. His heart is beating without adrenaline support. Neurologist has recommended a declaration of brain death.
    I want to know if there is any way a stem cell treatment can assist with the damage done to the brain / brain stem by the disease.
    I look forward to your response.

    Thank you.


  7. Unfortunately I am not aware of anything that would help that situation using stem cells.


  8. i would like to know if this product is available in South Africa. If so, where can it be obtained? there are so many ladies that is in DIRE need of this product including myself. Kindly advise soonest.
    Many thanks
    Kind regards
    Freda


  9. What’s your opinion on adipose stem cell reproduction as a therapy for OA of the knees vs. knee replacement? Has Celltex, RNL Bio been granted an FDA clinical trial in Sugarland ,TX? Celltex advertises their Houston/Sugarland Lab is nairy FDA approved? Does UC Davis SOM have a stem cellI research facilities in line with UC Berkeley SOM and Stanford SOM?


  10. In April I suffered a blow to the neck that has left me partially paralyzed. I am recovering and have seen a lot of function returning and lately a big increase in sensation. Are there stem cell treatments here or overseas that you would suggest might be worth considering to speed up my recovery?


  11. I have COPD. It is taking a real toll on me physically. Does stem cell therapy hold any hope for people with this desease? I appreciate your comments and your knowledge!

  12. Pingback: Flash contest: win free ticket to see Yamanaka & friends in SFO | Knoepfler Lab Stem Cell Blog


  13. My interest in learning about normal and cancer stem cells dates back to my post residency days when I studied the biology of CD133+/CD34+/- cells isolated by MACS and FACS to study survival pathways (NFKB, PI3’K/AKT, and MAPK) through morphoproteomic analysis. Recently, I evaluated signaling mechanisms in CML progenitors using the novel mass cytometry (CyTOF) technology. Based on these data, I received the BD Biosciences 2013 Stem Cell Award. I think this conference will enhance my knowledge in the field which I feel strongly committed to delve further into using the latest technologies in single cell analysis.

  14. Pingback: Stem Cell Job: Postdoctoral Position at UC Davis School of Medicine | Knoepfler Lab Stem Cell Blog


  15. Do you know who is going to patent Chen and Rolls discoveries in neuroscience. I think maybe not all can catch it. Science with great help from IPS. Is this science you do not pay so much attention, because it is not a stem cell treatment, but research done with just the help of the IPS? Make scare tissue regenerate fully fuctional neurons by virus with some genes? Do you consider this as a breaktrough rather than Multistem? I can not yet understand the power of Multistem by Athersys? Is it just a fraud? I think things are going to accelerate pretty fast this year and I think the big pharmas can loose huge amount of income by not pay attention. I think much of the old cell based therapies is going to be out of date within this year. What do you think?


  16. Hi,

    First, let me say that I’m so impressed by this website, and I’m so glad there’s a good source of information– and it’s available for scientists and non-scientists alike! :)

    My question is about Stemcell Tech (STEM’s) studies that are attempting the same treatment that ACTC has been working on for basically the same length of time. I’ve seen a lot of claims that it’s some kind of outright “race to the finish line” as far as who will develop the drug first, but it just seems to me that STEM’s work has too many unanswered questions, too many unresolved issues, and too many aspects that don’t really add up. I’ve been trying to point out these problems– because I don’t think it’s exactly rocket science– but I don’t think it’s getting through to some people. The fact that STEM was approved to move to Phase II from Phase I means absolutely nothing in terms of efficacy, only of safety. They have never released a paper in a peer-reviewed journal dealing with human subjects, only with rodents, and at the same point, ACTC did (the Lancet paper that Robert Lanza was involved in.) They also haven’t made any announcements about success with any patients, which ACTC did do (earlier than Phase Ii, actually.) I just think that it isn’t adding up. But I’m only an MSW! :)

    And I have motives for wishful thinking in both directions, I totally admit. I do have investments in ACTC, but I would rather lose every cent if it meant that someone else came up with a cure faster. So I just can’t be sure. I would LOVE to hear your opinion on this one. :)


  17. Sorry– to clarify, it’s the AMD/SSD/MMD/really rare forms drug that both STEM and ACTC are working on.


  18. Paul have you had time to look at Lanza embryonic MSC paper ?

    New Mesenchymal Stem Cell Population from Human Pluripotent Stem Cells Displays Potent Immunomodulatory and Therapeutic Properties
    March 24, 2014 04:55 PM Eastern Daylight Time
    MARLBOROUGH, Mass.–(BUSINESS WIRE)–Advanced Cell Technology, Inc. (“ACT”; OTCBB: ACTC), a leader in the field of regenerative medicine, and its collaborators reported today that it has discovered a new method to generate a potent and replenishable population of mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) from pluripotent stem cells. The research appears online ahead of print in Stem Cell and Development, one of the top stem cells journals, published by Mary Ann Liebert, Inc. This new and proprietary population of pluripotent stem cell-derived MSCs displays potent immunomodulatory and therapeutic properties and has a greater than 30,000 fold proliferative capacity, relative to ordinary bone marrow-derived MSCs, the most commonly used source for MSCs in clinical trials. The paper is available free online at http://online.liebertpub.com/doi/abs/10.1089/scd.2013.0554.

    I know you are up to your arm pits in STAP issues but this is important,too

    Potency of eMSC vs. adult MSC would like to know where you stand on Lanza’s data


  19. I agree 100%!! I think that a lot of us would love to see Paul’s take on the MSC paper.


  20. Hello Dr. Paul Knoepfler, thanks a lot for providing clarification in this Obokata’s STAP cell issue. I appreciate that you are covering all the bases pretty well. I look forward to reading your new postings. One item which has been missing with these batch of scientists is that humility of accepting what they did was wrong, prior to submitting the manuscript. If the purported manuscript underwent so many revisions, at least at one stage, the faked photos and cut and paste gel column clip could have been replaced by the ‘real’ ones. Don’t you think so?


  21. Do not waste your time on STAP cell.
    http://stapcells.blogspot.jp/
    Open in Google chrome. On sub-manual bar click translate Japanese to English.
    (XXXX edited) History can prove it. She copy / paste four pieces of images from her Ph. D. thesis and used them in her paper published at Nature. She did copy / pasted 20 pages on Stem Cell research from NIH review paper and included in her thesis exactly even without citation and permission. Look at this site how many copy / paste she has done until now:


  22. All she said was no more than sophistry. Whether there was need to repeat the same experiment up to 200 times. (XXXX edit) There should be no problem to write a paper if you can reproduce the same results in about five times. Attrition that it takes one week at a time experiment for STAP cell preparation, that 200 time x 7 days = 1400 days, three years or more. Well then, you will not believe that she did STAP cell 200 times. If she had had true STAP cell why she copy/pasted four images from her doctorate thesis, and until now she has not provided true image for STAP cell while she said she did 200 time repeated experiments. If write 1 page note for single experiment, she would have written a note of 400 pages, but there will be a note of the four books in this bamboo.


  23. Here is evidence of Obokata copy / paste (XXXX edit) research contents without author’s permission and citation.
    Obokata’s thesis Introduction on thesis:
    http://stapcells.up.seesaa.net/image/Background.pdf
    Obokata stole 200 pages of contents from paper at:
    http://stemcells.nih.gov/info/basics/pages/basics1.aspx
    Comparison of differences between two articles:
    http://altair.dbcls.jp/difff/dev/obokata_copypaste.html
    So, do not waste your precious time on STAP cell more.


  24. You are a bit behind on the STAP committee news …

    http://www.biosciencetechnology.com/blogs/2014/05/many-%E2%80%9Cacid-bath%E2%80%9D-stem-cell-investigators-are-investigated

    Cynthia Fox
    Tue, 05/06/2014 – 3:05pm
    Many “Acid Bath” Stem Cell Investigators Are Investigated

    Most members of the committee investigating the Nature “acid bath” papers are now under investigation themselves.

    But in the middle of the pondering: more trouble. Shunsuke Ishii, head of the committee charging Obokata with image falsification and fabrication, was charged himself (first by anonymous Japanese scientist/bloggers, then others) with errors in a 13 August 2007 Oncogene paper of his own. The problem: cutting and pasting gel images. He explained this occurred so the order would match explanations in the text. On April 26, he offered to resign.

    On April 28, still more trouble. Nobel prize-winning induced pluripotent stem cell (iPSC) researcher Shinya Yamanaka held a press conference in which he apologized for a problematic image in a paper of his from 2000. He had not held onto notes from the scientist responsible for the problem. He was cleared by his university. The situation was markedly different. His body of work is highly reproducible, unlike Obokata’s, and his iPSC technique is used in labs worldwide. But only days before, he was counseling students to stringently avoid careless errors. He appeared shaken as he apologized, according to Science.

    see the biosciencetechnology blog for complete article.


  25. I recently read the following regarding iPS stem cells:

    Increased risks for cancer?

    But a study that has just been published in the journal Cell Death and Differentiation, to be followed by two articles in the journal Nature, is dampening those hopes. Conducted by the Department of Biochemistry at the University of Geneva and the European Institute of Oncology in Milan, with the participation of Trono’s laboratory, it concludes that these reprogrammed cells exhibit a “genomic instability” that appears to be caused by the process used to return the cells to their embryonic state.

    Even more serious, the genetic mutations observed resemble mutations that are found in cancer cells. The scientists draw the conclusion that reprogrammed stem cells need to be extensively investigated before they can even be considered for use in regenerative medicine.
    The experiments were done using mouse mammary and fibroblast cells. The researchers used three different processes for reprogramming the cells to a “stem,” or embryonic, state. The first method was developed expressly for this study, and the others have already been well documented.

    Yet all the processes led to the same, implacable conclusion: the genetic anomalies multiplied, in a manner that seems to indicate that they are inherent to the reprogramming process itself, which typically makes use of oncogenes. “Interestingly, oncogenes have the potential to induce genomic instability,” the authors explain.

    These results underline the necessity of conducting further studies. First, to see if the genetic anomalies are serious enough to compromise the function and stability of cells regenerated using the reprogrammed cells; and second, to “refine the methods used for generating induced pluripotent cells, in order to avoid this problem. These results will thus motivate scientists to come up with a solution,” concludes Trono.

    What is your opinion?

  26. Pingback: iPS Cells may promote increased risk for cancer.


  27. How can the editor in chief (Shyam kakkar) of JOR be one of the authors in his own journal yet declare no conflict of interest. I would like to point out that JOR has been publishing a number of VSEL related paper with editor in chief being author in several of them? does it really mean that those papers got published after a fair peer review?


  28. It’s a year since my lAst post… what are you doing ref MCSC/ aware of regarding the efficacy of Pt-cultured MCSC in the treatment of knee OA? Understand the proceedure: Celltex takes the sample, it’s sent to Mexico for culture; Pt goes to Mexico to undergo proceedure w/ Pt-cultured MCSC. If you’re not doing research in this area, please refer me to who is. Thanks, Hank… I’m not the Hank who posted 03-25-14; but am interested in your take on the Lanza paper.


  29. If you know. . .Does Dr. Victor own the U.S. and Australian patents personally or does SVFC>


  30. Are doctors such as yourself so timid about not applying any potential cures unless the FDA says so? I know see how the FDA is in bed with Big Pharma in your country. I suggest that you wake and open your eyes, the whole world is passing you bye on Stem cell therapies, which work. If they did not work, patients would be the first to state so.

    D. G. Patino MD, PhD.


  31. Hello Dr. Knoepfler,

    I am a student at UC Davis and a follower of your blog. I missed my chance to ask you this question on your Reddit AMA so I thought I would try here instead. There’s been a lot of buzz recently about 3D cell scaffold technology and the exciting implications that it can have for stem cell research and maybe even therapeutic use. As an expert in your field, what do you think about this technology and the hype surrounding it?
    Thank you for your time.


  32. What is transcription factors and how do we define differentiation, pluripotency are the key to understanding Lanza’s magic cells?……eMSC

    So here are the definitions from wikipedia TF “In molecular biology and genetics, a transcription factor (sometimes called a sequence-specific DNA-binding factor) is a protein that binds to specific DNA sequences (ATCG), thereby controlling the flow (or transcription) of genetic information from DNA to messenger RNA(mRNA)”

    Differentiation “Stem cells are undifferentiated biological cells that can differentiate into specialized cells and can divide (through mitosis) to produce more embryonic stem cells. Therefore embryonic stem cells, which are isolated from the inner cell mass of blastocysts.”

    What is the different between of blastomere and blastocysts?
    “Early mammalian blastomeres are thought to be flexible and totipotent allowing the embryo to overcome perturbations in its organization during preimplantation development. In the past, experiments using single blastomeres from 2-, 4- and 8-cell stage mammalian embryos have provided evidence that at least some of the isolated cells can develop into healthy fertile animals and therefore are totipotent. We investigated whether isolated blastomeres of human 4-cell stage embryos could develop in vitro into blastocysts with trophectoderm (TE) and inner cell mass (ICM)”

    The four blastomeres of a 4-cell stage human embryo are able to develop individually into blastocysts with inner cell mass and trophectoderm

    Embryonic stem cells and progenitor cells “act as a repair system for the body, replenishing adult tissues. In a developing embryo, stem cells can differentiate into all the specialized cells—ectoderm, endoderm and mesoderm, but also maintain the normal turnover of regenerative organs and cells , such as epithelium, blood, skin, or intestinal tissues.” The main cells we are interested in are the repair of the epithelium to mesenchymal also known as EMT.

    OCT4 and SOX2, NANOG can combine both ‘‘repression’’ and ‘‘activating’’ modifications; they are enriched in embryonic cells relative to differentiated and or Pluripotency cells; and they are associated with genes encoding transcription factors with roles in embryonic development and lineage lines. In differentiated cells, the genes tend to be controlling with the regions located either an activating or a repressive methylation expression. Methylation is CH3 in an enriched CpG( cytosine nucleotide occurs next to a guanine nucleotide) regions on the DNA.

    Are not ACTc blastomere pluripotent stem cells and and are they not pre- embryonic in the sense of embryology phase? The laymen associates embryos with blastomere cells which function in the microenvironment…..

    Are ACTc cells mislabel from a science point of view?


  33. Having both knees done Friday 9/19 in Dallas.
    If it works as described- I will become the number 1 salesman in 3 to 6 months.
    Otherwise- I will be getting them replaced in 1 to 2 years.
    Worth it to me.
    I will let you know. I will be taking daily notes.


  34. ابنى مريض بالسكر وعمره 4 سنوات ونصحنى طبيب بعد عمل التحاليل الازمه بعمل عملية الخلايا الجزعيه له ينتهى مرض السكر من ابنى تماما وطلبوا ان يكون المتبرع من اقارب الدرجه الاولى


  35. Hi I was wondering if you have any products for a 46 year old female trying to get pregnant.if not do you have any clinical trials.i live in toronto and I am willing to travel


  36. Hello.
    Help me find a cure for his daughter!
    You own more detailed information.
    I read about the treatment of the cells (restore neural connections in the brain).

    Kind regards,
    Liudmyla.


  37. are YOU ready to fire up the human tissue bio regeneration machine This year, medical doctors? I know I am! do YOU all need a human lab assistant, to Safely study on, right Now?!?! Here I Am To Save Your Bio Medical Bio Regeneration Day! Yes YOU Can!


  38. Any news on stem cells curing sensorineural hearing loss? Any clinical trials? The thought of a cochlear implant upsets me too much. I want my hearing back! It’s like being tortured everyday.


  39. Paul can you report out on UC Davis’s conference on ethics of stem cells Feb. 12 ,2015…..

    can you post hi lites?


  40. Yes, I’m working on it. There was a lot of material so post most likely won’t be up until this weekend. Stay tuned. Great meeting!


  41. Nice to meet you in person, Cathy. I’ll let you know if I need more info, etc. Thanks for attending and being part of the discussion.


  42. HI Paul, we have been actively working with NHS UK to introduce a cooler bag for the transportation of stem cells, etc.. I believe this is something that could be introduced everywhere and improve the security when transporting such delicate products.. let me know if you would like more information. http://www.coolicebox.com


  43. Hello Dr. Knoepfler,

    I’ve read your very informative Open letter to UK Parliament (Nov 2, 2014) concerning “mitochondrial donation”.

    But I am asking me (and you): Is your position unavoidably condemned to failure?
    Once IVF and embryonic stemm cell reasearch etc. are regarded as “good”, how can one expect that the follow-ups like “mitochondrial donation” are seen as “bad”? In other words: if the taboo of intervention in the procreation of men has fallen, why should there rest any taboos, any “stop-signs” afterwards?
    Of course, society and everyone have always a choice – in principle. But once it is signaled to all: “Hey, you can ‘make’ your child!”, won’t it be futile to expect that in fact this would not be extended to “Oh, I can make my child as I want/ as I ‘need’!”

    What do you think?


  44. Thanks for the comment, March. You raise some interesting questions.
    I do think on one level there is a very strong chance that the UK will go ahead with “mitochondrial donation” no matter what I or anybody else says. Still, I feel strongly that the technology isn’t ready for use today and raises complex ethical questions so it is important to try to spark discussion even if practically speaking it may not make a difference. They seem to be in a rush mentality and have a powerful group lobbying for it.

    But you are asking more of a long term question it seems. I do not think that once IVF was approved that it 100% inevitably leads to new more extreme forms of IVF that include tinkering with the human genome, but certainly without IVF it wouldn’t be technically possible. Still I can see your point. The embryonic stem cell connection you suggest seems more tangential to me since it is not about making a child even though it too relies on IVF.


  45. tol masayo takahashi,
    I lost my central vision early in 2009 due to Plaquenil toxicity I need to know if you stem cell retinal regeneration is a viable option for my retinal disorder.
    I am excited about your new research


  46. Thanks for your answer, Mr. Knoepfler.
    I think we both agree that 3-parents technologies are not 100% inevitable. But I still wonder how they could be prevented. The main point of your Open Letter is the risks of such procedures for the new human being. But did risks ever count for much in modern human interference of reproduction? The first-generation pills were of high risks for women (and even the modern forms have non-neglectible side effects). IVF is a risky procedure, for the women – and even more for the new earthling. Statistics say that only 3% of the fertilized zygotes finally get born (I dont know if these numbers include or exclude pre-karyogamy zygotes). In other words there is a 97% risk for the embryo to live hard and die (very, very) young. In this view, already IVF without features like mitochondrial donation is a “premature” procedure, which should not have been allowed.
    The risk of deceased babies by “pure” IVF does not seem to bother many people, so why should any one, let alone a majority care about the severe risks of mitochondrial donation? If a baby might be disabled as a result – hey, just remove it while it is in the belly; that’s what our society is already used to.

    And a little further: if I understand you well, you do not oppose the technology in question as a principle, but “only” at this early stage with its high risks. How low has the risk to be in your view to render m.donation acceptable? What could valid criterions be (as we are not talking about curing an ill child, but preventing it)? How many times greater must the chance for preventing m. disorders (this figure being always only a probability) be than the chance of producing disabled children this way?


  47. Hi Paul,

    I must thank you for your excellent book “Stemcells an insiders guide”
    At the end of last year i had the idea that Stemcell therapy could help me and i searched high and low on the internet for information.
    Then i came across a video of Dr.Roberto Shapiro and i just could not stop watching this video,i thought that finally i saw a talk by somebody had seen the light.
    After that i discovered a video series of Dr Arnold Caplan’s talk in Panama.
    His talk was very informative.After seing this talk i felt something of a expert.
    I am now at page 83 of your book and i aam starting to understand that autologus stemcell therapy is not going to be a option.

    So why not using a medicine to release stemcells from the bone marrow would this not be a very safe option unless this medicine does more damage then good.
    I think that i have seen a video with a talk of Dr.N Reirdon on youtube how used to be a cancer researcher.
    As for me i have a mild or beginning toxic polyneuropathy and even if it is a beginning or mild case i am not sure what the outlook for the rest of my life is going to be so i am looking at options


  48. I noticed you blasted stem cell worx as a snake-oil product without a single fact to back up your opinion. Is that your idea of balanced reporting?

Leave a Reply