• We have updated Tinnitus Talk.

    If you come across any issues, please use our contact form to get in touch.

South Korean Clinic Treatment (Dr. Minbo Shim)

@JohnAdams, I think you are correct in what you are getting at. If a cure is not profitable enough, no one would produce it in the corporate world. Everyone has a vested interest, and there are those of us who are die hards for western science, and others with probably a tad of open-mindedness laced with a dash of naivety.

I found a quote for you, I dug through my copy of "Stem Cell Therapy, A Rising Tide" by Neil H Riordan PhD; it reads, "In May of 2016, the prominent British Medical Journal released a study that reported medical error to be the third leading cause of death in the United States. That means that you are more likely to die of medical error made by your doctor or medical practitioner than you are of all but two other conditions --heart disease or cancer."

Not that I think that this tells of the safety of SC and other alternative or FDA unapproved treatments, and I don't even necessarily agree with him making this statement in his book as to quell concern while simultaneously bolstering confidence in his own treatment, but I found this statistic very informative, and evidence that the Western option is no guarantee either, and that prudently we would be just as skeptical of it. I think you need look no further than ototoxic drugs, which is very likely to have been a factor in my own condition. I was young when I was taking them, and was advised by the pharmacist that "there are virtually no side effects." Turns out, I got "virtually" screwed.

I have not verified the citation of Dr. Riordan's statement, though I will list it for skeptics, as I could be foolish for taking his word:

"Makary MA and Daniel M. Medical error --the third leading cause of death in the US. BMJ. 2016;353:i2139. do: 10.1136/bmj.i2139."
 
Earlier this year I was discussing the idea of autologous stem cell therapy with my ENT. She was thinking aloud, but said in all seriousness, "find a way to bring the stem cell extraction here and we could try an intra-tympanic injection." She had not previously done that before, and we did not pursue it, but in thinking back on the conversation it seems not so very far off from what it sounds like Dr. Minbo Shim may be doing.

Point being, if I could be having this type of conversation with an ENT in the US, I can see how Dr. Shim could be taking the next step and actually doing something along those lines in Korea, trying it out for real.
 
Well somebody's blunt lmao. I honestly burst out laughing. If nothing else, Shim at least has a very likable character.
 

Attachments

  • supportcells.png
    supportcells.png
    33.3 KB · Views: 84
It would be nice if he could elaborate on why it is stupid. I really wish we could get him in to this thread so that he could take questions. He even has a message to our thread on his website, thanking us for our interests or something. My best reference to this is Wilden, who was decently helpful when you didn't approach him with a harsh demeanor. This poor guy barely speaks English, he would get such a badgering.

@Artemis2K , maybe you could get him to take a question pool, we could all submit 1 or 2 to you and he could answer. Load him up with about 100 questions for him to send back in a week or two. I dunno, but I'd really like some of the earlier posters I have read through now to continue commenting now that we have his Patent info.
 
@lymebite, I imagine you are nearly up to date with the postings here, I saw you posting way back, and you yourself have undergone similar treatment, if you don't mind me saying publicly; I'm curious after looking through the Patent info, you have any thoughts to share with us?
 
I'm curious after looking through the Patent info, you have any thoughts to share with us?

I have been keeping up with the most of the postings on the thread but not the patent links / attachments. I will take a look and see if any thoughts. Though I am wondering why it took me so long to connect my conversation with my ENT with Dr. Shim's work, all cylinders clearly are not firing too well. But I have read the Riordan book so that is something at least, maybe I will have an insight.
 
I have been keeping up with the most of the postings on the thread but not the patent links / attachments. I will take a look and see if any thoughts. Though I am wondering why it took me so long to connect my conversation with my ENT with Dr. Shim's work, all cylinders clearly are not firing too well. But I have read the Riordan book so that is something at least, maybe I will have an insight.


If you recall, you are why I have read the Riordan book, haha. So if I am wrong in any way, it is your fault. ;)
 
@humptydumpty69 - have been reading through the patent you tracked down, very interesting, that is a great find. I have a couple connections with people who are knowledgeable about this sort of area, which is an unusual space - it covers the practice of medicine, stem cells, and auditory disorders. Dr. Shim's space for sure, but not too many people cover all three of those bases. Anyway, I will float it around for their thoughts.

In the hyperacusis area especially, there is some speculation that chronic inner ear inflammation may be a potential root cause of symptoms. My understanding is that PRP is highly anti-inflammatory. So I wonder if this is a big part of the results - the benefits of bringing PRP in close enough to the inner ear to act as a powerful anti-inflammatory and therefore improve ear symptoms. The patent link includes a reference to this:

"The sensorineural hearing loss may be caused by inflammatory diseases such as labyrinthitis, encephalomeningitis, etc."

So seems like you might really be onto something here. Will see what I can find out, if anything, might take a while.
 
Huh. This reminds me. At one point I mentioned LLLT to Shim. His response was that he was not sure he believed it worked, but if it did it "probably had something to do with anti-inflammation of the lesions." I don't know what that means.
 
@JohnAdams, I think you are correct in what you are getting at. If a cure is not profitable enough, no one would produce it in the corporate world. Everyone has a vested interest, and there are those of us who are die hards for western science, and others with probably a tad of open-mindedness laced with a dash of naivety.

I found a quote for you, I dug through my copy of "Stem Cell Therapy, A Rising Tide" by Neil H Riordan PhD; it reads, "In May of 2016, the prominent British Medical Journal released a study that reported medical error to be the third leading cause of death in the United States. That means that you are more likely to die of medical error made by your doctor or medical practitioner than you are of all but two other conditions --heart disease or cancer."

Not that I think that this tells of the safety of SC and other alternative or FDA unapproved treatments, and I don't even necessarily agree with him making this statement in his book as to quell concern while simultaneously bolstering confidence in his own treatment, but I found this statistic very informative, and evidence that the Western option is no guarantee either, and that prudently we would be just as skeptical of it. I think you need look no further than ototoxic drugs, which is very likely to have been a factor in my own condition. I was young when I was taking them, and was advised by the pharmacist that "there are virtually no side effects." Turns out, I got "virtually" screwed.

I have not verified the citation of Dr. Riordan's statement, though I will list it for skeptics, as I could be foolish for taking his word:

"Makary MA and Daniel M. Medical error --the third leading cause of death in the US. BMJ. 2016;353:i2139. do: 10.1136/bmj.i2139."
There is a high initial cost for FDA approval, if a drug or procedure can't even pay that back in a reasonable time, what company would pursue it?

Makes you wonder how many drugs are out there that a company developed but didn't move forward because they were based on off the shelf or naturally occurring ingredients.
 
I think you need look no further than ototoxic drugs, which is very likely to have been a factor in my own condition. I was young when I was taking them, and was advised by the pharmacist that "there are virtually no side effects.
Mind telling us what med it was. I suspect Venlafaxine, Mirtazapine and Atenolol might have contributed to my hearing loss.
 
There is a high initial cost for FDA approval, if a drug or procedure can't even pay that back in a reasonable time

My understanding is that for the most part the FDA does not regulate procedures, only substances. Hence the D for the word "drug" in the name. Procedures would be governed by state medical boards.

This is why the FDA's gradual increasing regulating of stem cells is so controversial - some argue that autologous stem cell surgery is a medical procedure, and therefore should not be regulated by the FDA. Others argue that a person's own stem cells are in fact a drug and therefore do come under the FDA's purview.
 
My understanding is that for the most part the FDA does not regulate procedures, only substances. Hence the D for the word "drug" in the name. Procedures would be governed by state medical boards.

This is why the FDA's gradual increasing regulating of stem cells is so controversial - some argue that autologous stem cell surgery is a medical procedure, and therefore should not be regulated by the FDA. Others argue that a person's own stem cells are in fact a drug and therefore do come under the FDA's purview.
Then I wonder if anyone in America does this?
 
"The main mechanism with my treatment is that the hair cell them selfs regenerate", says Dr. Minbo Shim.

Isn´t this, at best, unprecise? What does he mean by that?
 
Huh. This reminds me. At one point I mentioned LLLT to Shim. His response was that he was not sure he believed it worked, but if it did it "probably had something to do with anti-inflammation of the lesions." I don't know what that means.
LLLT rarely works, please forget about that treatment modality.
 
"The main mechanism with my treatment is that the hair cell them selfs regenerate", says Dr. Minbo Shim.

Isn´t this, at best, unprecise? What does he mean by that?
I guess if hearing is restored in noise damaged individuals then that would be a logical conclusion, plus the growth factors he uses are implicated in haircell regeneration.
 
He said that he can't do anything about an already destroyed cochlea organ. What does he mean by that? The profoundly deaf? Can that be applied to regional structure damage?
 
I think I have found out, what he is doing.
In this picture (date: 2016-06-21) in the russian Facebook presentation of the clinic he says "there is hope" for hearing loss with IGF-1.



From what I have understood in some papers, IGF-1 is the "Insulin-like growth factor 1" and is linked to two pathways in the cochlea which promote the restoration of not-yet dead hair cells.

I will state the titles of the papers here only, because I am not allowed to copy them (copyright violation). When you have university access, you can access them for sure.

The first paper shows the general importance of IGF1 in the cochlea and the second paper shows the results of IGF1 treatment after sudden sensinoiral hearing loss. Both papers are directly shown in his facebook post:
1: Cediel, Rafael, et al. "Sensorineural hearing loss in insulin‐like growth factor I‐null mice: a new model of human deafness." European Journal of Neuroscience 23.2 (2006): 587-590.
2: Nakagawa, Takayuki, et al. "Audiometric outcomes of topical IGF1 treatment for sudden deafness refractory to systemic steroids." Otology & neurotology 33.6 (2012): 941-946.

By using google scholar i have found a new review paper about IGF1 which recaps the effect of IGF-1 on cochlear cells. In short, it says that IGF-1 was found to be safe to use and effective in HC protection and regeneration of not dead HCs:
Yamahara, Kohei, et al. "Insulin-like growth factor 1: a novel treatment for the protection or regeneration of cochlear hair cells." Hearing research 330 (2015): 2-9.

I think he is using IGF1 but it is still unclear what he is doing else. Because in this picture he is saying, the methods are: blood, fatty tissue and tubinate). Maybe he is using this as gel?





@Artemis2K,

So I just went through my notes that I took, as well as some of the actual thread again; I would have documented any videos that were posted, and I can't find anything about this one. The above quote does pertain to Russia, unfortunately the links have expired. Also, I don't recall any further translation of any videos. Maybe someone could check up on me, I may have missed it.
 
Can any Russian speakers translate this for us?
Delegation of doctors from South Korea went to Khabarovsk (Russia) to share their experience with Russian doctors.

Shim Minbo - "We have implemented breakthrough technology to restore hearing. Our doctors are able to control cell and tissue regeneration process. We are able to restore hearing even if the loss is very severe. To date people around the world have come to our clinic.​

--PS I believe him
 
Hey can you look at that video again?


Thank you @Artemis2K, that was alluding me, mostly because that is page 2 and I didn't think it was posted that early. Thought it would follow a video posting.

Are you sure that is the same video? @Coleoptere, you think you could get us a full translation? I really found the whole video interesting; would love to know what the hell they are talking about if it is associated with Shim. I wonder if there is anything we could compare and contrast with his patent.
 

Log in or register to get the full forum benefits!

Register

Register on Tinnitus Talk for free!

Register Now