Data — Instagram Data

Author: lynch_regenerative_medicine clear

2 rows · sorted by score DESC

Author

Followers

Tier

Eng

✓

Type

Likes

Cmts

Score

Sentiment

Date

Keyword

Caption

Transcript

Link

lynch_regenerative_medicine

536

nano

veryhigh

post

726

125

85.0

negative

2026-03-03

regenerative medicine

To set the record straight.

No audio available

↗

commenter	comment	sentiment
@erace_amp	A drug manufacturer, publicizing a cease and desist to an individual medical provider, after making a big show of hiring general counsel…who presumably signed off on this social media post. Big yikes. You really thought you’d get zero pushback on your ridiculous claims about this little synthetic growth factor, didn’t you? Finger wag harder guys, it’s going great. ?	negative
∟ @brett.fletcher_cfo	@erace_amp I see your point, but was this an individual medical provider repeatedly posting negatively on social media or her competing company posting them and then promoting her competing products right afterwards? I could see a few negative posts or stories, but not over a hundred of them while tagging other injectors throughout the country. It will be intriguing to follow what happens with this case. ?	neutral
∟ @brett.fletcher_cfo	@erace_amp so no answer to my question then? And thanks for looking at my profile. ?	neutral
∟ @brett.fletcher_cfo	@erace_amp thanks for the respectful debate. We will see what the future has in store for this topic.	neutral
∟ @dr.thuydoan	@erace_amp 🙌🙌🙌🙌 agree 1000%!!!	positive
∟ @cosmic_injector	@erace_amp Interesting to hear criticism about PDGF from someone connected to a product like EXOE. Sounds like you’re a competitor. For clarity, PDGF-BB is the same recombinant growth factor found in multiple FDA-approved medications, with decades of published literature behind it. Meanwhile, EXOE and other topical exosome products are not FDA-approved drugs or biologics, and there are currently no FDA-approved exosome products on the market according to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.	negative
∟ @cosmic_injector	@erace_amp It’s interesting to watch someone criticize PDGF-BB — a recombinant growth factor used in multiple FDA-approved medications with decades of published literature — while promoting an exosome product with no FDA-approved active ingredient and extremely limited human clinical data. I don’t speak for LRM. I keep up with new and evolving research, technologies, and evidence-based literature so I can learn, grown, and evolve as a practitioner. That’s not “copy-paste talking points.” That’s called staying educated in your field.	negative
∟ @cosmic_injector	@erace_amp you’ve said nothing substantial in this statement. The clinical evidence for EXOE is extremely limited, consisting largely of small, uncontrolled studies, subjective outcome measures, and manufacturer-sponsored data…. YIKES. There are currently no large randomized controlled trials demonstrating superior wound healing or inflammation reduction compared to established therapies. Link the data- I’m all for evidence based research and I’m eager to learn.	negative
@injectorlina	Why is a pharmaceutical company posting this publically on Instagram which creates a space for other aesthetic medicine providers to tear down and bully another provider. Another sad day in our speciality.	negative
∟ @cosmic_injector	@injectorlina I understand the thought behind this and typically I would feel the same. This situation is very different. When a physician publicly and repeatedly claims that a product promotes cancer, misrepresents regulatory labeling, and encourages providers to discontinue use, that is not casual commentary. Those statements have real consequences — for patients, for providers, and for businesses. A company has the right — and frankly the responsibility — to respond when it believes false or misleading information is being circulated. Silence is not professionalism. Addressing serious public allegations directly is. If someone is repeatedly asserting that a product “causes cancer” while mischaracterizing FDA history, what is the expectation — that the company simply remain silent? Public accusations invite public clarification. Accountability is not bullying. It is part of practicing within a regulated medical environment. And when those claims are amplified to an audience of 100,000+ followers, while providers are simultaneously being reported to medical boards, this is no longer about interpersonal conflict. It is about impact. At that scale, statements shape patient perception, influence clinical decisions, and affect professional reputations. When allegations are made publicly and repeatedly, a public response is not retaliation — it is proportional and necessary. ?	neutral
∟ @aesthetic_md_tobago	@injectorlina this literally means squat as it is an intimidation letter. And the burden of any proof will be hard to come by and like I said the reality will be that she gets to get discovery and they and their KOL’s will have the greater risk in this. So I really hope it gets to a trial situation so we get real clarity of what is going on so hopefully she responds in kind for them not to destroy their documentation. I’m not team either as they both now come of as petty and IG is not where we should be doing legal briefs.	negative
∟ @dr.thuydoan	@injectorlina AGREE!!!! What does this prove by posting it here? That they're better? 🙄 ?	negative
∟ @the.arizona.injector	@injectorlina she posts about sending cease and desists to other providers fairly often. I feel like this is similar.	neutral
∟ @sarahsafa_refinedaesthetics	@injectorlina I believe they are being transparent, leaving no room for misinterpretation.	positive
∟ @cosmic_injector	@injectorlina Companies are entitled to respond through appropriate legal and regulatory mechanisms. I understand your point that this letter shouldn’t have been publicized. However, I feel public allegations invite public clarification.	neutral
@dr.thuydoan	This is a form of cyberbullying. This is intimidation by publication by a pharmaceutical company. A legitimate cease and desist notice is delivered privately through email or certified mail ONLY. Posting a legal threat publicly before initiating formal legal action does not resolve a dispute. It is a deliberate attempt to influence perception and apply reputational pressure. I am not intimidated. 😂 Defamation requires false statements of fact. My statements were based on publicly available regulatory documents and published data. There is no FDA approved PDGF product for facial injectable use, and there is no FDA approved facial injectable study establishing safety and efficacy for THAT indication. Those are objective facts. Scientific debate belongs in evidence, not intimidation. I will continue to advocate for evidence based medicine and transparent discussion. 🙌	negative
@lizdidmylips	I would love this energy towards fda approval of pdgf bb	positive
∟ @dr.thuydoan	@lizdidmylips FDA approved products only! 🙌 Send us a Facial Injectable study!	positive
∟ @dr.thuydoan	@lizdidmylips Agree! Whats the hurry? 🤷‍♀️ ?	positive
∟ @cosmic_injector	@lizdidmylips I hope you don’t feel pushed to use something you aren’t comfortable with. I’m sorry if that’s how you’ve been feeling. What many are pushing for is accurate representation of the science and respectful professional discourse. If someone personally decides they’re not comfortable using a treatment until there’s a specific FDA indication, that’s completely reasonable — every provider has their own threshold for what they feel comfortable offering. But that choice shouldn’t extend to misrepresenting the data or encouraging people to report colleagues to medical boards who are practicing within informed consent and existing regulatory frameworks. From a non injectable standpoint and used topically- this was also framed to be dangerous for topical use which has no credible basis. That kind of environment doesn’t move medicine forward. Innovation in medicine has always involved thoughtful early adopters and open scientific discussion.	positive
@jenrn_jenesysaesthetics	Stay tuned because the energy is there 💪🏼	positive
∟ @lizdidmylips	@jenrn_jenesysaesthetics perfect, would love to see it instead of trying to silence “opposing” opinions and other relevant studies. Not a good look 🤔	negative
∟ @lizdidmylips	@jenrn_jenesysaesthetics I used it for almost a year- not worth losing my license over. they are certainly not saying don’t inject it , and they are certainly not going to cover you when someone sues you for negligence. They definitely fed on the “gray area” that we “use lots of things off label” when in fact this is not even on label. There’s no indication.	negative
∟ @aesthetically.stacy	@jenrn_jenesysaesthetics about damn time	positive
@the.arizona.injector	It's fast tracked for FDA approval. But that still takes time.	neutral
@dr.josepharusso	Happening. Takes years	neutral
@jenrn_jenesysaesthetics	If you’re referring to the opposing opinions of Dr Doan she was spreading lies and skewing data so she was not an opposing opinion. If you don’t believe in a product then don’t use it. But outright lies should be handled exactly in the way LRM has handled it	negative
∟ @lizdidmylips	@jenrn_jenesysaesthetics perfect, would love to see it instead of trying to silence “opposing” opinions and other relevant studies. Not a good look 🤔	negative
∟ @lizdidmylips	@jenrn_jenesysaesthetics I used it for almost a year- not worth losing my license over. they are certainly not saying don’t inject it , and they are certainly not going to cover you when someone sues you for negligence. They definitely fed on the “gray area” that we “use lots of things off label” when in fact this is not even on label. There’s no indication.	negative
∟ @aesthetically.stacy	@jenrn_jenesysaesthetics about damn time	positive
@jenrn_jenesysaesthetics	They aren’t pushing anyone to use it. We make decisions on what products to use in our practices. I’ve used it for two years and it’s amazing and blows PRF and PRP out of the water.	positive
∟ @lizdidmylips	@jenrn_jenesysaesthetics perfect, would love to see it instead of trying to silence “opposing” opinions and other relevant studies. Not a good look 🤔	negative
∟ @lizdidmylips	@jenrn_jenesysaesthetics I used it for almost a year- not worth losing my license over. they are certainly not saying don’t inject it , and they are certainly not going to cover you when someone sues you for negligence. They definitely fed on the “gray area” that we “use lots of things off label” when in fact this is not even on label. There’s no indication.	negative
∟ @aesthetically.stacy	@jenrn_jenesysaesthetics about damn time	positive
@m.aestheticswi	Did anyone else get into aesthetics assuming it would be far less toxic than in hospital environments and it’s non stop conflict only to see constant conflict and fighting here as well? Or maybe I’m just following high conflict posts? ?	negative
@injectionbarbie	I’m not for anyone bullying anyone… but her posts did feel icky and self serving to me 😢 but this post also doesn’t make me feel great.. but I do appreciate the clarification and points made about the omission of facts from the studies mentioned and think those are important highlights for providers and patients.	neutral
∟ @dr.thuydoan	@injectionbarbie There was no omission. Madison the Attorney clearly doesnt read ALL journal articles. She forgot to read the 2021 Adam Evan PRP Periorbital Rejuvenation study that use INJECTABLE prp so there is NO "comparable or limitation that applies to PRP or PRF" as she claimed. 😂	negative
@nooresthetiquewc	It was a joke really. They kept trying to piggy back off the FDA approval of diabetic wound treatment 30 years ago as the reason why it's gotta be safe and effective for the face. Fun fact: a face isn't a leg.	neutral
∟ @dr.thuydoan	@nooresthetiquewc Best comment 🙌❤️	positive
∟ @dr.thuydoan	@nooresthetiquewc They are going to take the main ingredient in Golytely and say it will flush the edema out of your face 😒😆	negative
∟ @cosmic_injector	@nooresthetiquewc Fun fact: wound healing biology doesn’t change depending on the location of the tissue. PDGF-BB was FDA-approved for its role in tissue regeneration and angiogenesis decades ago. The face isn’t a leg, but fibroblasts, collagen signaling, and growth factor pathways are still the same.	neutral
∟ @cosmic_injector	@nooresthetiquewc That analogy only works if you ignore basic biology. PDGF-BB is literally a growth factor involved in collagen signaling and tissue repair. GoLYTELY is an osmotic laxative. These aren’t comparable mechanisms.	neutral
∟ @cosmic_injector	@nooresthetiquewc So just to clarify — PDGF-BB is ‘pseudoscience,’ yet it’s the active component in multiple FDA-approved medications used clinically for wound healing. Are we dismissing FDA-reviewed therapeutics now, or only when it’s convenient for the argument? ?	negative
∟ @cosmic_injector	@nooresthetiquewc What do you think the growth factor in Ariessence actually is? The PDGF-BB used in the formulation is the same recombinant PDGF-BB — same manufacturer, lot traceability, and sourcing — as the PDGF-BB used in the four FDA-approved medications that contain it. We can absolutely have a discussion about indications and levels of evidence. That’s healthy scientific debate. But implying it’s some unknown or “cosmetic wannabe” growth factor isn’t accurate. I agree that we need clinical studies specifically evaluating safety and efficacy in the face, and those studies are already underway. But implying the molecule itself is some unknown cosmetic ingredient isn’t accurate. The biology and safety profile of PDGF-BB have been studied for decades. I mean this respectfully, but I don’t think you have all of the information about the sourcing or the underlying science. ?	neutral
@rnesthetics_ma	Who is next 👀?? We have an obligation as medical providers to stop the spread misinformation for likes and views. ?	neutral
@beauty_rn_jc	Just another reason why this field is so muddy with toxic behavior, jealousy, envy and spite. This post promotes more division amongst providers. If this is truly a legal matter in which LRM would like to pursue, posting this is fuel to her fire. There is something to be said about doing the right thing. And posting this letter in my opinion, is not the right thing.	negative
∟ @dr.thuydoan	@beauty_rn_jc thank you for this ❤️. Letters like this needs to ve private. This says a lot about his and her character	positive
@theaestheticbear_	Is this really what our field has come to? Not a good look for either side of this argument, nor is it a good look for our field of medicine to be publicly arguing over a social media platform. 🤦🏻‍♂️ ?	negative
∟ @dccm_tara	@theaestheticbear_ agree… those that performed the procedures are ultimately publicly admitting or denying litigation because every social post is a representation of what will be held against you in court.	negative
@tiffdermpa	Thank you guys for doing this! She’s also been harassing providers who utilize rhPDGF-BB if you need to strengthen your case 😉	neutral
∟ @orlandomedspa	@tiffdermpa also indirectly encouraging patients to report providers to the board.	negative
@dr.josepharusso	Why would anyone put so much time effort and energy into debasing a company with three prior approvals of the exact same product in three different areas of medicine which included long-term studies of safety, including oncologic, systemic, and local studies to name a few? Whenever you aren’t sure, just follow the money who stands to lose when people start using RES instead of PRP or PRF for PD any of these other things?😂 ?	negative
@dr.thuydoan	Ha! My Attorney will respond to this professionally. 😂	positive
@mikechandlermma	The tallest nail always gets hammered…keep going @lrm.aesthetics 👊🏼	positive
@cosmic_injector	THIS THIS THIS 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻I’ll be making a post about this! Stay tuned	positive
∟ @erace_amp	@cosmic_injector We are 100% plant based and topical only…so we don’t fall under those guidelines! There is a right way to do things! 🤲	positive
∟ @erace_amp	@cosmic_injector and someone wants to spend $150-$170 more per treatment on a single synthetic growth factors that is Significantly less effective than EXO\|E in wound healing, inflammation reduction and downtime decrease, just because some skinfluencer posted “OMG, literally obsessed with PDGF+, FR,FR!”, they are welcome to it. It’s just not the best decision for their bottom line. Keep copying and pasting those talking points that LRM is sending you though… You’re doing great!	negative
∟ @injectorlina	@cosmic_injector clarification on the science is one thing, a legal letter addressed to her is a whole other thing…	negative
∟ @dr.thuydoan	@cosmic_injector You must have not read the 2 journal articles on EXOGENOUS PDGF-BB Administeration "proliferating" cancer of pancreatic and lung cancer. Undereyes is highly vascularized so risk of systemic spread is NOT ZERO. Im not Anti-PDGF. We just want standardized regulation and approval and study.	negative
∟ @dr.thuydoan	@cosmic_injector I never stated that PDGF injections cause cancer. I stated that PDGF is a growth factor and that exogenous PDGF-BB has been shown in published literature to increase cellular proliferation in certain cancer models. Proliferation is not the same as causation, and I have been clear about that distinction. There will not be randomized in vivo human trials assessing cancer risk from aesthetic PDGF injections. It would be unethical to intentionally expose patients to a theoretical oncologic risk for study purposes. Much of oncology signaling research is conducted in vitro for that reason. Scientific discussion requires precision. My statements reflect what the literature demonstrates about growth factor biology and proliferative signaling. Others may interpret the risk differently. That is their choice.	neutral
∟ @lizdidmylips	@cosmic_injector agreed- but I don’t agree with the way that this product was sold and peddled to injectors using “KOLs” in general. As if it was “OK to inject“ if you’re comfortable doing it. For the safety of both injectors and patients is prudent that we wait for FDA approval and have more data and therefore informed decision making and studies involving the actual tissue that we’re injecting instead of looking at data from diabetic foot ulcers, which definitely reacts differently than normal under eye tissue. But always respect you and your opinion XOXO.❤️	negative
∟ @nooresthetiquewc	@cosmic_injector oh thank God you're here to explain wound healing! Then I'm sure the folks at Pseudoscience, i mean Ariessence, have no problem submitting their data showing the non inferiority of their PDGF/HA complex in wound healing as compared to...aquaphor? How shall we test this hypothesis? ?	positive
∟ @nooresthetiquewc	@cosmic_injector yeah recombinant PDGF, not Ariessence's cosmetic wannabe product. You can't piggyback an FDA indication for a totally different reason (wound healing in diabetic leg) and try to assume it's equally as awesome or better for topical cosmetic applications without actual proof. Of course I'm sure the folks have studies on this. The studies probably include 5 people filling out a post procedure questionnaire claiming "awesome" under results of their topical application. A post procedure survey on a handful of people isn't a very rigorous study. It's just a non scientific survey used by marketers masquerading as scientists. But again, a diabetic leg with severe Vascular disease isn't the same as a delicate face on an assumed, healthy nondiabetic face. Their marketing is full on theory but short on fact	negative
∟ @nurseinjectorari	@cosmic_injector can’t wait to hear your take on this 👏🏾	positive
∟ @injectorlina	@cosmic_injector I’m all for clarification on the science. That’s what makes medicine, medicine. But a legal letter personally addressed to her with the comments on that gives a feel of a “public stoning”, I don’t support.	negative
@platinumsculpt.bg	👏👏👏	positive
@fernandaheckman	Providers who are attempting to turn anything into a witch hunt should be ashamed of themselves and legally reprimanded. Thank you for not backing down and for reporting all the facts.	negative
∟ @dr.thuydoan	@fernandaheckman You call it a half truth. I call it citing the literature. I posted the article so anyone can read the full data themselves. Instagram comments are not journal publications. My concern is simple. Providers should understand the regulatory reality and the science before injecting products. There is no FDA approved PDGF product for facial injectable use. Raising that discussion is not a witch hunt. It is responsible medical dialogue. If you disagree with the interpretation, debate the science. Personal attacks do not change the facts. Having leaders in the industry ENCOURAGING providers to use a Non FDA product sits well with you? ?	neutral
∟ @nooresthetiquewc	@fernandaheckman i mean the company is bragging about suing someone. That's not hard. Let's see if they can prevail in the courts...	negative
∟ @hlywd_aesthetics	@fernandaheckman This!!!! 🙌	positive
∟ @dr.josepharusso	@fernandaheckman 😍🙌	positive
@injectorhoney	🙌🙌🙌 about time	positive
@jenrn_jenesysaesthetics	I’m sure a few of you know how I feel about this 💪🏼 👏🏻 😉	positive
∟ @lizdidmylips	@jenrn_jenesysaesthetics perfect, would love to see it instead of trying to silence “opposing” opinions and other relevant studies. Not a good look 🤔	negative
∟ @lizdidmylips	@jenrn_jenesysaesthetics I used it for almost a year- not worth losing my license over. they are certainly not saying don’t inject it , and they are certainly not going to cover you when someone sues you for negligence. They definitely fed on the “gray area” that we “use lots of things off label” when in fact this is not even on label. There’s no indication.	negative
∟ @aesthetically.stacy	@jenrn_jenesysaesthetics about damn time	positive
@dwhitecnp	Is a standing ovation possible in the emoji world? I am so proud of this post. This company, its employees and Dr Lynch have been publicly DRAGGED for some time now. Also being poised and offering anyone an audience to talk. Yet being positioned as if they haven’t. I truly wish this company could post its true receipts that they have on many of our peers involved in this mayhem and their personal interest in why they are doing this. They love to cover it under a superior ethics cloak, but that is all false folks. Congratulations @lynch_regenerative_medicine for standing up for yourself and and thank you for standing up for us…. your customers. ?	positive
@injector.crystal	The world is already deeply divided, as medical professionals we should strive to model respectful discourse and coexistence, even when perspectives differ. Medicine should unite us rather than divide us.	positive
@agelesswithamber	Thank you for clearing this up! This misleading information is very confusing for patients.	positive
@skinliv	I love that you address it straight on for full transparency!! You have to do that!!! Good for you!!!	positive
@barbarinosurgicalarts	The truth always comes to light🙌🙌🙌 thank you for showing us what people don’t want us to see. Say what you mean and mean what you say. 🎤 drop.	positive
@jaderamadan_pac	Thank you, make it stop. It’s a broken record at this point.	negative
@theaesthetics_np	🙌 Finally. 👏👏	positive
@thelovelyguide	Good for you guys!! 👏👏👏👏	positive
∟ @fernandaheckman to @injectorzoe	@injectorzoe I told her almost the same thing.	neutral
∟ @myethos360 to @injectorzoe	@injectorzoe exactly. lol	positive
∟ @rnesthetics_ma to @injectorzoe	@injectorzoe yep thinking the same thing after doing a training with her	positive
∟ @erace_amp to @brett	@brett.fletcher_cfo it’ll never cease to be hilarious how this company tries to filter their talking points (or “off label” misinterpretations) out through the KOLs they met when selling them toxins years ago. Or those KOL’s husbands, I guess.	negative
∟ @erace_amp to @brett	@brett.fletcher_cfo the answer is, there is a noticeable roster of KOL’s who spend an inordinate amount of time defending this synthetic little growth factor almost as vociferously as Dr. Doan calls it into question. They've hosted patreons, lectured people online (incorrectly) about the definition of off-label (huge red flag that they don’t know the correct definition, BTW) and are constantly in the company's Instagram comments scolding skeptics. Dr. Doan has a small piece of the very large PRF/ PRP/Platelet Gel pie...but the first place any of these people want to go with anyone is to imply we are all just motivated by money. It's a predictable pattern, and it always makes me think of black pots and kettles for some reason. Funny, that.	negative
∟ @botoxbarbiela to @aesthetic_md_tobago	@aesthetic_md_tobago I think it shows transparency. Something that was not provided by her only providing her POV. Not leaving comments open for other providers. Creating a dangerous bias for her patients. I had direct communication with her through DM's. She blocked me because she didn't like my POV. Anything that happens in the dark, should be questioned. My original question to her was why she didn't address this with company's medical liaison, to provide clarity on her (many confusing) points. Instead went to a public platform... ironically at the same time as her launch. This is sus. And should be addressed publically. If not for anything, to set an example of this unethical behavior o & dissuade other providers from acting in this manner.	negative
∟ @aesthetic_md_tobago to @botoxbarbiela	@botoxbarbiela it can be addressed any way they want but reality anyone who has gone through this kind of litigation which I have I was the offended party and guess what all that came of it they could no longer mention my product unless it actually goes to trial no proof of anything will happen it is just grand standing. Which is great but proves nothing. We all get she likes to block and purge any people or posts she wants that is the IG game. Plus basically and unfortunately all this social media “defaming” is almost impossible to litigate as the laws have not caught up to the technology. So again not pro either just know and have lived through this kind of bull and no one is ever a winner, but the optics are cool.	negative
∟ @dr.thuydoan to @the	@the.arizona.injector Its always sent PRIVATELY. Not on a public forum.	neutral
∟ @cosmic_injector to @aesthetic_md_tobago	@aesthetic_md_tobago I’ve decided to make it a priority to post weekly articles about PDGF bb. Highlighting the facts and trying to be an non biased as possible- I’ll also include the downfalls of the studies as well. I think in the midst of all this misinformation I want to try to highlight what the literature actually says. If we’re going to discuss risk, let’s do it responsibly. If we’re going to raise concerns, let’s cite properly. If we’re going to treat patients, let’s consent clearly. Clarity thrives in evidence and that is what I want to put my energy into.	neutral
∟ @cosmic_injector to @dr	@dr.thuydoan I agree that scientific debate should be grounded in evidence. That’s exactly why I’m addressing this: several statements you made publicly were inaccurate and/or overstated, including melanoma statistics and the implication that PDGF proliferates cancer as a demonstrated fact. Many of the studies you use are fragmented and taken out of context. It’s accurate to state there is no FDA-approved PDGF product for facial injectable use and no FDA-approved facial injectable trials establishing safety/efficacy for that indication. But extrapolating that into definitive claims of carcinogenic risk is not supported by the cited data. This is spreading false information.	negative
∟ @cosmic_injector to @dr	@dr.thuydoan I agree and you better believe those are coming. However- PDGF-BB is a growth factor—so yes, in cell-line experiments, adding recombinant (‘exogenous’) PDGF-BB can increase proliferation or signaling in certain cancer models. That’s not shocking, and it’s also not the same claim as ‘PDGF injections cause cancer in humans.’ Those papers show in vitro / model behavior under controlled conditions (often at supraphysiologic dosing) and do not establish clinical causation, incidence, or real-world risk from aesthetic use. Also worth noting: PDGF biology is context-dependent—there are even studies showing PDGF-BB signaling can behave differently in vivo, including reduced tumor growth in some models. So cherry-picking two lab studies and calling it ‘settled’ isn’t science. It’s an agenda.	neutral
∟ @cosmic_injector to @dr	@dr.thuydoan the gaslighting is unreal right now. Precision does matter. That’s exactly the point. You may say you “never stated PDGF causes cancer,” but you repeatedly referenced melanoma in direct proximity to aesthetic PDGF microneedling and discussed proliferative signaling in a way that clearly suggested clinical relevance. When melanoma is invoked in that context, the implication is not subtle. If the intent was purely academic discussion of growth factor biology, the framing would have stayed in mechanistic language — not positioned beside aesthetic use in a way that alarms providers and patients. Additionally, the statement that “3 out of 10 people walk around with undiagnosed melanoma” was factually incorrect. That statistic does not reflect established epidemiologic data. Yet there was no public correction or clarification after it was challenged. If we are emphasizing scientific precision, that standard applies universally. You cannot: • Invoke melanoma risk rhetorically • Present selective in-vitro proliferation data • Cite inflated or inaccurate prevalence statistics • Then retreat to “I never said causation” when the implication is called out Proliferation ≠ causation — agreed. But implication without clinical evidence is not neutrality either. If we’re committed to evidence-based discussion, then full-context representation of the literature and accurate epidemiology are non-negotiable. Scientific discourse requires rigor. That includes correcting misstatements when they occur.	negative
∟ @cosmic_injector to @dr	@dr.thuydoan if I can remind you of your entire post regarding PDGF and cancers. “To be fair, PDGF does not "cause" cancer BUT it progress EXISTING tumor, therefore grows the tumor. 30% of patients walk around with undiagnosed Melanoma (3 out of 10 ppl) Your Esthetician or you aren't looking for Melanoma PRIOR to your Microneedling procedure. Some melanoma looks like a normal mole to you.” Your post then goes on to imply tumor growth which there is absolutely no date to show that therapeutic PDGF bb increases tumor growth in humans. However, we have long term data showing safety and efficacy in the 4 FDA approved medications that contain PDGF bb. That is significant.	negative
∟ @fernandaheckman to @dr	@dr.thuydoan you can’t publicly dish out half-truths and call for unfounded, divisive witch hunts from your IG… and then get salty when you’re given a dose of your own behavior.	negative
∟ @fernandaheckman to @dr	@dr.thuydoan oh Dear, we’ve read your posts where you pepper real published articles with your own opinions sneakily mixed in as alleged facts. It’s embarrassing to our industry. But go on. The social media engagement is being masterfully crafted and achieved. 👏	negative
∟ @fernandaheckman to @dr	@dr.thuydoan against me? You don’t even know me. The issue is you act and speak arrogantly, and you misconstrue facts in a very dishonest way. So yeah, I called you out. ?	negative
∟ @hlywd_aesthetics to @dr	@dr.thuydoan #crashout	negative
∟ @lizdidmylips to @the	@the.arizona.injector that’s fine. I just am sick of the push to use it when it’s not approved. What’s the hurry? It will still be there when it’s FDA approved. Results are good, but not enough for me to lose my license over. I can do the same thing with PRF in a few sessions. ?	negative
∟ @lizdidmylips to @dr	@dr.josepharusso perfect, then we can wait.	positive
∟ @m.aestheticswi to @aesthetic_md_tobago	@aesthetic_md_tobago because we own and operate our spaces and not around a sea of other disgruntled coworkers and it’s not corporate medicine and honestly this list can get much larger	positive
∟ @aesthetic_md_tobago to @m	@m.aestheticswi well some that own these places are some of your old disgruntled co workers. Just because you own your own business doesn’t mean you are not miserable. It’s not only healthy emotional people that go out on their own.	negative
∟ @injector_valerie to @m	@m.aestheticswi on point	positive
∟ @injectionbarbie to @dr	@dr.thuydoan im not here to argue just as someone who read your posts I would have appreciated a little more clarity on the studies and claims you made and knowing that those studies were old and the fda warnings were old. Things like that 🤷🏼‍♀️ that’s what felt not transparent and it felt not transparent intentionally. but only you know your motives and im not here to decide what that is, I’m only here saying how it felt to me.	negative
∟ @injectionsbyheather to @dr	@dr.josepharusso exactly always follow the money and what they have to lose.	negative
∟ @allenmedicalaesthetics to @dr	@dr.thuydoan I love that you laugh at this. 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 You inspire me more than you know!	positive
∟ @dr.thuydoan to @allenmedicalaesthetics	@allenmedicalaesthetics They act like Im scared. I send these to others all the time. Im not new to Cease and Desist. This letter is BASELESS. 😂 Clearly, their Attorney Madison does not read all journal articles.	negative
∟ @cosmic_injector to @injector	@injector.marcus it’s time	positive