The Miami Stem Cell Therapy Podcast cover art

The Miami Stem Cell Therapy Podcast

The Miami Stem Cell Therapy Podcast

Written by: miamistemcelltherapy
Listen for free

About this listen

The Miami Stem Cell Podcast by STEMS Health Regenerative Medicine in Miami Beach, Florida, is an informational, synthetic narrated podcast designed to educate listeners about the science and practice of regenerative medicine. Each episode delivers clear, evidence-based insights on topics such as stem cell therapy, PRP, exosomes, peptides, and anti-aging innovations, reflecting the clinical expertise of Dr. Ankeet Choxi and Dr. Jarred Mait. Created for patients and wellness-minded listeners, the podcast simplifies complex medical topics while emphasizing safety, transparency, and real-world applications - helping you stay informed about the latest advances in regenerative and longevity medicine. To learn more about regenerative and restorative treatments, visit stemshealthregenerativemedicine.com or schedule a consultation at our Miami Beach clinic, located at 925 W 41st St #300A, Miami Beach, FL 33140, (305) 677.0565.

Copyright 2025 All rights reserved. Hygiene & Healthy Living Physical Illness & Disease
Episodes
  • Ep. 20 Guide to Stem Cell Therapy for Common Conditions

    Ep. 20 Guide to Stem Cell Therapy for Common Conditions
    Jan 27 2026
    To learn more about regenerative and restorative stem cell therapy treatments, visit stemshealthregenerativemedicine.com or schedule a consultation at our Miami Beach clinic, located at 925 W 41st St #300A, Miami Beach, FL 33140, You can also reach us by phone at (305) 677.0565. FULL TRANSCRIPT Guide to Stem Cell Therapy for Common Conditions Welcome to the STEMS Health Regenerative Medicine Podcast. I’m your host, and today we’re covering an important topic that often generates more questions than clear answers. This episode is a condition-by-condition guide to stem cell therapy - what the science currently supports, where evidence is limited or mixed, and where treatments remain largely experimental. Stem cell therapy is frequently discussed as a broad solution for many health problems. In reality, its potential benefits - and its limitations - depend heavily on the specific condition being treated. Evidence that supports one use does not automatically apply to another, even when similar types of cells are involved. The goal of today’s episode is education. Not recommendations. Not promises. Just a clearer framework for understanding how stem cell therapy is actually studied and applied across different medical conditions, so patients can ask better questions and evaluate claims more critically. Let’s start with an essential concept. Stem cell therapy is not a single treatment. It includes a range of approaches that differ based on tissue type - such as cartilage, tendon, nerve, or heart muscle - the underlying disease mechanism, the method of delivery, and the intended outcome. That outcome might be pain relief, functional improvement, immune modulation, or support for tissue signaling. Because of these differences, evidence varies widely by condition. A therapy that shows promise for joint pain may not be biologically plausible - or clinically appropriate - for neurologic or autoimmune disease. Understanding this variability is key to realistic expectations and safe decision-making. Throughout this episode, we’ll refer to three broad evidence categories. First, more established or stronger evidence. These are areas where multiple clinical studies exist and findings are relatively consistent, even though outcomes still vary and long-term data may be limited. Second, limited or mixed evidence. These include small studies, early clinical trials, or inconsistent results. Some patients may benefit, but conclusions remain uncertain. And third, primarily experimental. These applications are early-stage, often limited to laboratory research or small human trials. They are investigational and not considered standard care. It’s important to note that stronger evidence does not mean guaranteed results. And experimental does not automatically mean unsafe. These categories simply reflect how much is known - and how much remains uncertain. Now let’s look at specific conditions, starting with orthopedic and musculoskeletal uses. Orthopedic conditions are among the most commonly discussed applications of stem cell therapy. That’s largely because joints and soft tissues are structurally defined, allowing for localized delivery rather than systemic treatment. Outcomes such as pain and function are also easier to measure, and the underlying degenerative and inflammatory mechanisms are better understood. That said, evidence still varies significantly by condition. Knee osteoarthritis is one of the most studied orthopedic applications. Research has focused on pain reduction, functional improvement, and changes in the joint environment. The evidence here is moderate but mixed. Some studies report improvements in pain and mobility, particularly in earlier-stage disease. However, severity matters. Structural cartilage regeneration remains inconsistent, and results vary widely between patients. Importantly, stem cell therapy is not considered a replacement for joint replacement surgery in advanced arthritis. Other joint conditions - such as the hip, shoulder, and ankle - follow similar principles, but the research is less extensive. Evidence is generally limited to moderate, with smaller studies, fewer long-term outcomes, and greater variability due to joint mechanics and load. Expectations should remain conservative, especially in advanced degeneration. Tendon and ligament injuries are another area of interest because these tissues heal slowly due to limited blood supply. Research has explored whether stem cell therapy may help support the healing environment. Evidence here is limited and condition-specific. Some early studies suggest potential benefit, but outcomes depend heavily on injury severity, how long the injury has been present, and adherence to rehabilitation. Spine and disc-related conditions are more complex. Research has focused on disc degeneration, pain modulation, and local inflammation. Evidence is early and mixed. Stem cell therapy does not address structural compression or ...
    Show More Show Less
    11 mins
  • Ep. 19 Joe Rogan Talks About Stem Cell Treatment in Mexico - So What’s the Case for Care in the U.S.?

    Ep. 19 Joe Rogan Talks About Stem Cell Treatment in Mexico - So What’s the Case for Care in the U.S.?
    Jan 23 2026
    To learn more about regenerative and restorative stem cell therapy treatments, visit stemshealthregenerativemedicine.com or schedule a consultation at our Miami Beach clinic, located at 925 W 41st St #300A, Miami Beach, FL 33140, You can also reach us by phone at (305) 677.0565. FULL TRANSCRIPT Joe Rogan Talks About Stem Cell Treatment in Mexico - So What’s the Case for Care in the U.S.? Welcome to the STEMS Health Regenerative Medicine Podcast. In today’s episode, we’re addressing a topic that often comes up in popular media and online discussions: Joe Rogan talking about stem cell treatment in Mexico - and what that means for patients considering care in the United States. Conversations about stem cell therapy don’t just happen in medical journals anymore. They show up in podcasts, social media, and personal stories shared by athletes, celebrities, and public figures. Joe Rogan has been one of the most influential voices bringing attention to stem cell treatment abroad, particularly in Mexico. That visibility has helped raise awareness, especially among people frustrated by chronic pain, injuries, or slow recovery. But awareness alone doesn’t answer the most important question for patients: where is the safest and most appropriate place to receive care? The answer isn’t simply Mexico or the United States. It’s about understanding tradeoffs, evidence, and accountability. So let’s break this down clearly. When Joe Rogan talks about stem cell therapy in Mexico, he’s usually pointing to a few consistent themes. The first is access and speed. In many cases, biologic treatments are available more quickly outside the U.S., with fewer regulatory hurdles. The second is personal stories. Rogan often references athletes or public figures who report improvement after treatment abroad. And the third is frustration with bureaucracy. Like many patients, he has expressed skepticism about how long it can take for new medical approaches to become widely available in the United States. These points resonate because they reflect real patient frustration. People dealing with pain or functional limitations often feel stuck between “nothing left to try” and “nothing approved yet.” But when patients decide to seek treatment abroad, they’re making choices that involve more than access alone. Medical tourism can offer options that aren’t widely available in the U.S., but it also comes with tradeoffs that aren’t always discussed. Patients who go abroad may encounter different regulatory standards, less consistent outcome reporting, and limited long-term follow-up once they return home. Many success stories shared publicly are anecdotal and short-term. They may reflect genuine individual experiences, but they don’t always show how a treatment performs across a broader patient population or over longer periods of time. This doesn’t mean overseas care is inherently unsafe or ineffective. It does mean that patients should understand what protections, safeguards, and accountability structures may differ. Now let’s talk about the case for stem cell care in the United States. U.S.-based stem cell care is often described as conservative - and that conservatism can be frustrating. But it also reflects a system designed around accountability and patient protection. Clinics operating in the U.S. are typically required to meet standards that include oversight by licensed physicians, formal informed consent that discloses when treatments are investigational, clear documentation of cell sourcing, handling, and delivery, and defined plans for follow-up care and complication management. Another important factor is continuity of care. Receiving treatment close to home makes it easier to coordinate with primary care providers, specialists, physical therapists, and rehabilitation teams if issues arise. For some patients, these safeguards outweigh the appeal of faster access. At its core, Joe Rogan’s commentary highlights a real tension in modern medicine: regulation versus access. Regulation can slow innovation and limit availability. But it also enforces standards around safety, advertising claims, and patient disclosure. U.S. clinics are generally required to be more cautious in how they describe expected outcomes and risks. They’re held to stricter standards when it comes to documentation, informed consent, and claims made to patients. So the real decision many patients face isn’t about geography. It’s about risk tolerance. Some people prioritize speed and flexibility. Others prioritize structure, oversight, and recourse if something goes wrong. Instead of asking, “Should I go to Mexico or stay in the U.S.?” a better set of questions might be: Who is overseeing my care? What evidence exists for my specific condition? Is this treatment considered standard, investigational, or experimental? How are risks explained to me? And what follow-up care is available if problems arise? These questions...
    Show More Show Less
    7 mins
  • Ep. 18 Guide to Evaluating a Stem Cell Clinic

    Ep. 18 Guide to Evaluating a Stem Cell Clinic
    Jan 21 2026
    To learn more about regenerative and restorative stem cell therapy treatments, visit stemshealthregenerativemedicine.com or schedule a consultation at our Miami Beach clinic, located at 925 W 41st St #300A, Miami Beach, FL 33140, You can also reach us by phone at (305) 677.0565. FULL TRANSCRIPT - Guide to Evaluating a Stem Cell Clinic Welcome to the STEMS Health Regenerative Medicine Podcast. Today’s episode is a patient-education guide to evaluating a stem cell clinic - focused on due diligence, safety, and informed decision-making. Stem cell therapy is increasingly discussed as an option in regenerative medicine, especially for joint pain, musculoskeletal injuries, and degenerative conditions. At the same time, clinics offering stem cell-based treatments can vary widely in medical oversight, transparency, and standards of care. Our purpose today is not to promote treatment or discourage it. The goal is to help patients ask better questions, recognize red flags, and understand what responsible regenerative care should include. Let’s start with why evaluating a clinic matters. Stem cell therapy is not a single, standardized treatment. It can involve different cell sources, processing methods, delivery techniques, and regulatory pathways. And for many conditions, applications are still considered investigational. Because of that, clinics may differ significantly in medical oversight, provider credentials, whether they participate in clinical trials, how they explain evidence, how they handle regulatory disclosures, how they price treatment, and what follow-up care they provide. These differences directly affect patient safety, expectations, and outcomes. A careful evaluation helps patients distinguish between evidence-informed care and marketing-driven claims. The first place to start is medical oversight and provider credentials. A foundational question is simple: who is making the medical decisions? Stem cell-based care should be overseen by licensed medical providers - typically physicians - who are responsible for evaluating the patient, diagnosing the condition, determining whether regenerative therapy is appropriate, performing or supervising procedures, and managing follow-up care and complications. As a patient, you should be able to clearly identify the licensed physician directing care, confirm that provider’s state medical license, understand their clinical role and scope of practice, and know who performs evaluations versus who is handling administrative tasks. Clinics operating primarily as wellness centers or sales organizations - rather than medical practices - may not provide the level of oversight appropriate for biologic therapies. That leads to an important question: who is actually making clinical decisions? Patients should clarify whether recommendations come from a licensed physician after an evaluation, or from non-clinical staff following preset protocols. Red flags include treatment plans presented before medical evaluation, one-size-fits-all protocols applied to all patients, and sales consultations that replace physician visits. Medical decisions should be made by clinicians, not by marketing or administrative teams. Next, let’s talk about clinical trials and research context. Some stem cell clinics participate in registered clinical trials. Others offer treatments that are informed by research but not part of a trial. These are not the same thing, and clinics should clearly explain the difference. Clinical trial registration can support transparency, ethical oversight, and defined outcome tracking. But not all legitimate care occurs within a trial setting. What matters most is honest disclosure of where a treatment falls on the research-to-practice spectrum. Patients can ask: is the clinic participating in a registered clinical trial? If so, where is it registered - such as ClinicalTrials dot gov? And does the clinic’s description match what the trial listing actually says? It’s also important to understand that registration does not guarantee effectiveness. It only indicates that the treatment is being studied under defined conditions. Now let’s address a common language trap: “research-based” versus “research-proven.” These terms are often used interchangeably, but they mean very different things. Research-based usually means a treatment is informed by scientific studies - often early-stage studies. Research-proven suggests consistent clinical evidence and broader acceptance. A responsible clinic should be willing to explain what level of evidence exists, what is still uncertain, and how that uncertainty is communicated to patients. Next is published data and evidence transparency. Not all stem cell applications have extensive published data, especially for emerging uses. That’s not automatically a problem - but how a clinic discusses evidence matters. Patients should understand the difference between peer-reviewed studies, case reports or ...
    Show More Show Less
    11 mins
No reviews yet