# What will happen when I have this joint checked?

*Clinic Visit Questions | Cellular Therapy Peoria*

> Use this cellular therapy Peoria guide to ask a stem cell clinic who examines you, what goes into the joint, and what it costs.

What happens when a clinic checks a sore joint? Before the visit, ask for the examiner's title and license. The office needs to say whether you'll see a doctor, nurse practitioner, or another licensed medical provider.

Expect questions about the ache's start, old injuries, medicine, sleep, walking, and lifting. The examiner then checks tender spots, puffiness, muscle strength, and how far the joint bends.

Bring old reports if you have them; you don't need to remember every medical word.

## What will the examiner need to know?

Use one finger to show where the ache begins, then say whether it travels. Mention a fall, twist, fever, or sudden loss of strength, along with any catching, locking, or giving way. These facts help separate long-term wear from a fresh problem.

Bring a list of your pills and main health problems. Blood thinners and some illnesses can make a marrow draw or joint treatment less safe. Keep taking each prescribed drug until the doctor named on its bottle says otherwise.

## Will I need an X-ray or another test?

Not every sore joint needs another X-ray. It can show bone shape, marks from an old injury, and the gap between the bones. A narrow gap may mean cartilage, the slick cover over bone ends, has worn down.

Because an X-ray can't show every tendon or other soft part, the hands-on exam guides the need for another test. Before agreeing, find out how the test could alter your care.

New weakness or a major injury may make more testing useful.

## What do I need to ask before choosing?

Ask the examiner to name the part causing the soreness. If blood or marrow treatment comes up, find out which liquid will enter the joint and why it may help that sore part.

Get plain answers about possible relief, known risks, full cost, and later visits. Results aren't certain, so pick a daily motion that would show useful change, such as getting out of a chair.

Ask when relief might begin and what you'll try if it doesn't. The visit may end with basic care, more time, or a surgical opinion.

## Sources

1. A 2016 analysis of internet marketing found widespread direct-to-consumer promotion of unapproved stem cell interventions by businesses based in the United States - not only in countries with lax medical regulation - and concluded regulators must better oversee the marketplace.
   Turner L, et al. — [Selling Stem Cells in the USA: Assessing the Direct-to-Consumer Industry](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27374789/). *Cell Stem Cell*, 2016. DOI: 10.1016/j.stem.2016.06.007.
2. Hundreds of US businesses and clinics market unproven and unlicensed stem cell-based interventions, and many of them appear to violate the federal regulations that govern human cell and tissue products.
   Turner L, et al. — [The US Direct-to-Consumer Marketplace for Autologous Stem Cell Interventions](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29805145/). *Perspect Biol Med*, 2018. DOI: 10.1353/pbm.2018.0024.
3. A 2019 JAMA research letter documented the credentials and scope of training of the physician and non-physician practitioners staffing US companies that market unproven stem cell procedures - many practise well outside the specialty their training covers.
   Fu W, et al. — [Characteristics and Scope of Training of Clinicians Participating in the US Direct-to-Consumer Marketplace for Unproven Stem Cell Interventions](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31237628/). *JAMA*, 2019. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2019.5837.
4. A systematic analysis of 243 clinic websites offering stem cell therapies found routine use of hype language and inconsistent disclosure of the experimental or unproven status of what was being sold, with complementary and alternative medicine practitioners heavily represented.
   Murdoch B, et al. — [Exploiting science? A systematic analysis of complementary and alternative medicine clinic websites' marketing of stem cell therapies](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29490963/). *BMJ Open*, 2018. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-019414.
5. In orders issued 26 December 2024 and announced 8 January 2025, a federal court permanently banned the co-founders of the Stem Cell Institute of America and their companies from marketing any regenerative medicine treatment, and ordered $5,155,146 in refunds and civil penalties. The court found on summary judgment that they published false and misleading advertisements about the efficacy and approval of stem cell injections for osteoarthritis, neuropathy and joint pain; their clinic charged up to $5,000 per injection and the customers were almost exclusively elderly and disabled people.
   US Federal Trade Commission — [Stem Cell Institute Co-Founders and Companies Banned from Marketing Stem Cell Treatments and Ordered to Pay More Than $5.1 Million for Refunds and Civil Penalties](https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2025/01/stem-cell-institute-co-founders-companies-banned-marketing-stem-cell-treatments-ordered-pay-more-51). *null*, 2025.
6. In October 2018 the FTC settled charges against a California physician and two companies that earned at least $3.31 million selling 'amniotic stem cell therapy' between 2014 and 2017 - initial injections cost $9,500 to $15,000 with booster treatments at $5,000 to $8,000 - for advertising, without evidence, that it treated Parkinson's disease, autism, macular degeneration, cerebral palsy, multiple sclerosis and osteoarthritis.
   US Federal Trade Commission — [FTC Stops Deceptive Health Claims by a Stem Cell Therapy Clinic](https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2018/10/ftc-stops-deceptive-health-claims-stem-cell-therapy-clinic). *null*, 2018.
7. A 2019 survey identified 40 US companies operating 76 clinics marketing 'cell therapy' for eye conditions, most using autologous adipose-derived cells, concentrated in California, Florida and Illinois - a map of how far the marketplace reaches beyond orthopedics.
   Nirwan RS, et al. — [Assessing "Cell Therapy" Clinics Offering Treatments of Ocular Conditions using Direct-to-Consumer Marketing Websites in the United States](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30904542/). *Ophthalmology*, 2019. DOI: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2019.03.019.
8. A comprehensive review of published case reports, clinical reports and media accounts catalogued the safety incidents associated with unproven stem cell interventions and the factors driving the global growth of the 'stem cell tourism' market.
   Bauer G, et al. — [Concise Review: A Comprehensive Analysis of Reported Adverse Events in Patients Receiving Unproven Stem Cell-Based Interventions](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30063299/). *Stem Cells Transl Med*, 2018. DOI: 10.1002/sctm.17-0282.
9. In 96 patients, concentrated bone marrow aspirate contained a mean of 26.3 million nucleated cells per mL but only about 1,422 colony-forming units of connective tissue progenitors, and the nucleated cell count had negligible predictive value for how many progenitor cells were actually present (r-squared 0.28).
   Muench LN, et al. — [Nucleated Cell Count Has Negligible Predictive Value for the Number of Colony-Forming Units for Connective Tissue Progenitor Cells (Stem Cells) in Bone Marrow Aspirate Harvested From the Proximal Humerus During Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33581306/). *Arthroscopy*, 2021. DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2021.01.064.
10. 21 CFR 1271.10(a) sets the four criteria a human cell or tissue product must meet to be regulated SOLELY under section 361 of the Public Health Service Act: it must be minimally manipulated; intended for homologous use only, as reflected by labeling and advertising; not combined with another article beyond water, crystalloids or a preserving agent; and either have no systemic effect and not depend on the metabolic activity of living cells, or else be for autologous use, use in a close blood relative, or reproductive use.
   US Code of Federal Regulations, Title 21 — [21 CFR 1271.10 - Are my HCT/P's regulated solely under section 361 of the PHS Act](https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-21/chapter-I/subchapter-L/part-1271/subpart-A/section-1271.10). *null*, 2004.
11. On 27 September 2024 the Ninth Circuit held in United States v. California Stem Cell Treatment Center that stromal vascular fraction produced by enzymatically digesting a patient's own fat IS a drug under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, and that the same surgical procedure exception does not apply because the removed fat and the implanted SVF are not the same thing. The district court's ruling for the clinics was reversed.
   United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit — [United States v. California Stem Cell Treatment Center, Inc., No. 22-56014 (9th Cir. Sept. 27, 2024)](https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2024/09/27/22-56014.pdf). *null*, 2024.
12. On 2 June 2021 the Eleventh Circuit affirmed an injunction against US Stem Cell Clinic in United States v. US Stem Cell Clinic, LLC, holding the clinic's adipose stem cell procedure fell outside BOTH the same surgical procedure exception and the 361 HCT/P exception - the latter because the clinic intended the cells to perform functions beyond the basic functions they performed before the procedure, which is the definition of non-homologous use.
   United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit — [United States v. US Stem Cell Clinic, LLC, No. 19-13276 (11th Cir. June 2, 2021)](https://media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/files/201913276.pdf). *null*, 2021.
13. In a 480-patient, four-arm, multicenter randomized phase 2/3 trial, none of three orthobiologic cell injections - autologous bone marrow aspirate concentrate, autologous adipose stromal vascular fraction, or allogeneic umbilical cord tissue-derived mesenchymal stromal cells - was superior to any other, or to a corticosteroid injection control, on pain at 12 months.
   Mautner K, et al. — [Cell-based versus corticosteroid injections for knee pain in osteoarthritis: a randomized phase 3 trial](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37919438/). *Nat Med*, 2023. DOI: 10.1038/s41591-023-02632-w.
14. FDA states in its consumer alert that the only FDA-approved stem cell products in the United States are blood-forming stem cells derived from umbilical cord blood, approved for disorders of the blood-forming system, and that NONE of these products - stem cells, stromal vascular fraction, umbilical cord blood, Wharton's jelly or amniotic fluid - has been approved for the treatment of any orthopedic condition, including osteoarthritis, tendonitis, disc disease, tennis elbow, back pain, hip pain, knee pain, neck pain or shoulder pain.
   US Food and Drug Administration, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research — [Consumer Alert on Regenerative Medicine Products Including Stem Cells and Exosomes](https://www.fda.gov/vaccines-blood-biologics/consumers-biologics/consumer-alert-regenerative-medicine-products-including-stem-cells-and-exosomes). *null*, 2020.

## What should I bring to the appointment?

Bring your medicine list, old joint reports, and one daily activity you want to make easier. The office is at 13128 N. 94th Dr., Suite 205, near Thunderbird Road and west of Loop 101. Call (602) 837-PAIN.

Book an appointment: <https://comprehensive-pain-management.qckaz.com/?src=cellulartherapypeoria.com>

---

Plain help for a joint that stays sore.

Cellular therapy Peoria covers a lasting joint ache, useful home measures, and non-surgical choices a clinic may discuss.

Plain Peoria help for aching joints, home relief, warning signs, and clinic visits.

This site is operated by the owners of the QC Kinetix Phoenix-area clinics, including the Peoria office recommended here, and the business benefits when readers schedule.

© 2026 Peoria Cellular Index. General health education, not medical advice or a personal candidacy decision.