SELLING HOPE BY THE VIAL
Inside the private medical company accused of exploiting science, loopholes and vulnerable patients
For years, Wellbeing International Foundation Ltd (WIF) has marketed itself as a pioneer of cutting-edge regenerative medicine — promising relief from chronic pain, repair of damaged tissue, and even protection against serious disease.
But an investigation drawing on undercover recordings, expert scientific analysis, and legal opinion paints a very different picture: one of extraordinary medical claims, minimal oversight, and sales practices that critics say cross the line from innovation into deception.
At the centre of the controversy are high-priced treatments — often costing tens of thousands of pounds or dollars — sold remotely, without medical consultation, and promoted using complex biological language that independent experts say is unsupported by clinical evidence.
The business of belief
WIF presents its therapies as a sophisticated alternative to traditional stem-cell treatments. Rather than transplanting live stem cells, the company claims to harness substances released by cells under stress — commonly referred to as extracellular vesicles, cytokines, or “secretomes”.
According to WIF representatives, these substances can be extracted from a patient’s own blood, processed in a laboratory, and then reintroduced intravenously to “educate” the body’s repair mechanisms.
In promotional discussions, these products are described as capable of:
reducing inflammation
repairing scar tissue
relieving chronic pain
improving function after injury
and, in some cases, influencing degenerative or immune-related disease
However, multiple independent scientists consulted during this investigation say such claims go far beyond what current medical science can support.
Medicine without doctors
One of the most striking findings of the investigation comes from undercover recordings obtained in both the UK and the United States.
In one recorded telephone call, an undercover operative based in the US speaks with Andrew Chancellor, who promotes a proposed treatment costing $48,000.
The entire interaction takes place by phone.
There is no physical examination. No diagnostic testing. No review of medical records. At no point is the patient advised to consult their own doctor.
Instead, Chancellor offers reassurance and logistics — explaining how blood would be collected, shipped overseas, processed, and returned for intravenous infusion. When asked who would administer the treatment, he responds:
“Well not your doctor, we can find a doctor for you.”
Medical experts later told the investigation that this statement is highly significant, as it appears to acknowledge that a patient’s own physician may be unwilling to participate.
Selling before assessing
The recordings show that price and payment are discussed early in the process — before any clinical assessment or discussion of medical risk.
Chancellor explains that two treatments would cost $48,000 and advises payment by direct bank transfer to a US account.
At no stage does he discuss:
risks or side effects
contraindications
alternative treatments
or the principles of informed consent
Experts who reviewed the transcript described the interaction as “deeply concerning”, particularly given the vulnerability of patients suffering from chronic pain or injury.
The laboratory link
WIF’s treatments rely on overseas laboratory processing — most notably through a German company, Ad Lentus.
On its website, Ad Lentus describes work involving autologous dendritic cell vaccines, which it characterises as a form of cancer immunotherapy and classifies as an Advanced Therapy Medicinal Product (ATMP).
Such claims are significant. ATMPs are among the most tightly regulated therapies in Europe, typically requiring:
extensive clinical trials
regulatory authorisation
strict Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) compliance
Yet investigators say there is no publicly available evidence that the therapies promoted through WIF and Ad Lentus have received such approvals.
Recorded admissions
In a recorded Zoom call involving an undercover operative, Jörn Steiger — listed on Ad Lentus’s website as a team member — discusses the laboratory’s role in processing patient blood.
During the conversation, Steiger confirms a long-standing working relationship with WIF and its founder, Steven Ray, stating that the laboratory follows protocols designed by WIF.
He describes isolating blood-derived cells and placing them under stress to induce the release of cytokines and microvesicles, insisting that no drugs or chemicals are added and that the final product is “100 per cent you”.
Independent scientists who reviewed these descriptions said the processes outlined raise serious questions about reproducibility, quality control, and whether such methods could plausibly produce a consistent or clinically effective therapeutic product.
Questions over capability and oversight
Investigators say they have received information from a source familiar with the Ad Lentus laboratory setup suggesting the facility lacks the specialised equipment typically required for advanced cell-based therapies. That source has not been identified due to professional and personal concerns.
While this claim cannot be independently verified at this stage, experts emphasised that producing legitimate ATMP-class products requires highly specialised infrastructure and regulatory scrutiny — far beyond what many private laboratories possess.
The investigation has also identified companies involved in transporting patient blood internationally, raising further questions about licensing, chain-of-custody, and compliance with biological material transport regulations.
These issues are the subject of ongoing inquiries.
What the science says
Stem-cell researchers and clinicians consulted for this investigation were blunt.
While extracellular vesicles and immune-cell signalling are legitimate areas of laboratory research, experts say translating early-stage science into commercial human treatments — particularly for serious conditions — requires years of controlled clinical trials.
“There is exciting research in this field,” one senior scientist said. “But what’s being marketed here skips the evidence entirely.”
Another expert described the therapies as, at best, unproven — and at worst, a misuse of scientific terminology to create an illusion of legitimacy.
Legal concerns
A commissioned legal opinion reviewed the undercover recordings and marketing practices. The advice concluded that the activities described raise serious concerns under UK law, including potential breaches of the Fraud Act 2006 and, in cases involving cancer claims, the Cancer Act 1939.
The opinion noted that if patients are induced to part with large sums of money based on misleading or unsupported medical claims, this may amount to fraudulent misrepresentation.
It also highlighted how regulatory loopholes — particularly the classification of products as “cell-free” — may be used to avoid stricter oversight while still making medical promises.
A familiar pattern
Experts say WIF is not operating in isolation.
Across Europe and the United States, a growing number of private clinics and companies market regenerative or stem-cell-adjacent therapies using:
vague scientific language
testimonials instead of trials
and complex logistics that keep patients distant from oversight
Regulators have repeatedly warned that such treatments may not only be ineffective, but may delay proper medical care.
Conclusion
This investigation is based on undercover recordings, documentary evidence, expert scientific assessment, and legal analysis. It does not make findings of criminal liability.
Its purpose is to inform patients, families, clinicians, and regulators about practices that independent experts say warrant urgent scrutiny — particularly where medical claims are mad
without consultation, evidence, or transparency.
Those named have been given, or will be given, the opportunity to respond.
As one scientist involved in the investigation put it:
“This isn’t medicine. It’s a business model. And the currency is hope.”
Comments
Post a Comment