[Still Standing]

Stan,
Based on my own interpretation of #3, I interpret it to mean that you would be denied coverage if your treatment was the subject of a research study. I think you would have to be a part of the study directly, or at the very least, your treatment facility would have to be conducting a research study involving a written protocol to which you are subjected. And I think your treatment would only be subjected to that written protocol if you were a subject participating in the research project. I don't think they can use a broad statement like #3 to include any treatment that is a part of any study anywhere. You should fully expect that there should be on-going studies evaluating any treatment-how else will the field of spinal surgery move forward? It is crucial to the evolution of the field of spinal surgery (or any field) to have on-going research and evaluation of the effectiveness of any treatment. That's my interpretation of the wording, for what it's worth.

By the way, I fit the FDA criteria, but ins. still denied my ADR anyway. I think they just automatically say NO. Reminds me of the Capital One commercial where David Spade is trainging the new guy that the answer is always no to any caller trying to redeem their credit card miles. The insurance company's answer is always NO! Hope your insurance company is different.