The Doctors Behind the Network: Patients, Businessmen and a Story That Goes Back Much Further

Behind Wellbeing — Chapter Three

n Chapter Two, we stopped counting clinics and started following the treatment.

That changed the picture.

Wellbeing International Foundation's 23-clinic network appears not to operate like a conventional chain of hospitals or medical centres owned by one organisation. Instead, the evidence points towards a distributed system involving approved collection points, independent clinicians, a German laboratory and clinical locations capable of administering the final intravenous preparation.

That leaves a much more important question.

Who is actually responsible for the patient?

But as we began following the doctors, another story emerged.

Because before asking who treats Wellbeing's patients today, we need to understand the people who built the organisation.

And once we put their histories in chronological order, the idea that Wellbeing simply emerged from a remarkable treatment experienced by an impressed patient becomes considerably more complicated.

First, We Need to Correct the Record

During this investigation we found an inconsistency inside our own historical material.

One later investigative report states that Andrew Chancellor became involved following successful treatment for a knee injury.

But when we returned to the original recorded consultation, that isn't what Stephen Ray actually said.

Ray was discussing Wellbeing's chairman.

The investigator asked whether he meant Andrew Chancellor.

Ray corrected him:

“Our CEO, Andrew Chancellor yes. He basically runs the company. The chairman was actually an original patient of ours, back in 2010 for a knee issue and he was really impressed and eventually came in on the business side.”

That chairman was Max Lewinsohn.

This distinction matters.

We are interested in evidence, not simply allegations contained in reports.

And in this case the primary evidence wins.

Max Lewinsohn: “I Came Across Wellbeing by Chance”

What makes Ray's recorded account particularly interesting is that Wellbeing's chairman has publicly told essentially the same story himself.

Lewinsohn says he became one of Wellbeing's earliest patients in 2010 after suffering serious problems with his right knee from years of sport.

In an interview published by Campden Family Business, Lewinsohn said:

“I came across Wellbeing by chance…”

He described being introduced by a friend, researching the treatment, undergoing it and subsequently experiencing a dramatic improvement.

Wellbeing's current public narrative says that he later joined the board following the organisation's reorganisation in 2016 and today serves as chairman. Max Lewinsohn

Taken alone, that is an entirely plausible story.

A patient experiences something he believes has helped him.

He becomes convinced by the technology.

He invests.

Eventually he joins the organisation.

It happens in healthcare businesses.

But Lewinsohn's story does not exist alone.

There was already another relationship developing around Stephen Ray's science.

And that relationship involved Andrew Chancellor.

Chancellor Wasn't a Patient Who Wandered Into Harley Street

The public corporate record gives us something much firmer than recollection.

Andrew Chancellor was already involved in bioscience businesses long before the present Wellbeing organisation took its current form.

Companies House records identify him as a director of Natural Biosciences Ltd from 20 April 2010.

Then, on 26 November 2014, Chancellor became a director of another biotechnology company:

Lydac Neuroscience Limited. Find and Update Company Information

That company should already be familiar to readers of our previous investigation.

Lydac is important because Stephen Ray had been there before him.

Ray was a director of Lydac from its incorporation in 2007 until July 2012.

And patent records connected Lydac directly to Ray's earlier microvesicle intellectual property.

Ray and Chancellor were not directors of Lydac at the same time, and we should not imply otherwise.

But they appear at different points in the history of the same biotechnology company.

That is a documented connection.

Then Chancellor Told an Investigator Something Even More Important

During one of the recorded conversations obtained by this investigation, Chancellor was asked about Wellbeing's relationship with its German laboratory.

His response takes us directly back to this earlier period.

Chancellor said that he and Ray had worked with the German laboratory connection since approximately 2010 or 2011, when the parties were associated with different companies.

He then described Ray as the central scientific figure behind the protocols being used.

The laboratory representative independently described a long-running relationship and said the laboratory carried out Wellbeing's protocols.

This isn't something reconstructed from company records decades later.

It is Chancellor describing the history himself during a conversation with someone he believed to be a prospective patient.

And it establishes an important point:

the Chancellor-Ray commercial/scientific relationship goes back far beyond the modern presentation of Wellbeing.

And Then There Is 10 Harley Street

This is where the physical investigation becomes particularly interesting.

Our investigators attended Wellbeing consultations at:

10 Harley Street, London.

We know this because those consultations were physically attended and recorded.

During one such consultation, Ray did most of the talking.

The proposed pathway was explained: blood would be taken, sent to Germany, processed and the resulting preparation returned for intravenous administration.

But 10 Harley Street has another history in this investigation.

Lydac Neuroscience operated from the same address.

This isn't based upon an anonymous allegation.

It appears in Britain's official insolvency record.

When administrators were appointed to Lydac Neuroscience on 17 December 2018, the Gazette recorded both its registered office and principal trading address as:

10 Harley Street, London W1G 9PF. The Gazette

After Lydac moved into creditors' voluntary liquidation, the Gazette again identified its principal trading address as 10 Harley Street. The Gazette

That matters.

Because we now have a physical address connecting two chapters of this story.

First Lydac. Then Wellbeing.

Put the chronology on one page.

Stephen Ray was an original director of Lydac Neuroscience.

Ray's microvesicle research was associated with intellectual property assigned to Lydac.

Ray left the board in 2012.

Andrew Chancellor became a Lydac director in 2014. Find and Update Company Information

Lydac subsequently operated from 10 Harley Street.

It entered administration in December 2018. The Gazette

It subsequently moved into creditors' voluntary liquidation in November 2019. The Gazette

Then our investigators attended Wellbeing consultations at 10 Harley Street, where Stephen Ray was once again explaining extracellular-vesicle science to prospective patients.

That doesn't prove that one company simply became another.

It doesn't prove that assets were improperly transferred.

And it doesn't establish wrongdoing.

But it creates a perfectly legitimate question:

How separate were these stories really?

A Failed Biotechnology Company — and Science That Continued

Lydac's failure is not an allegation.

It is documented corporate history.

Administrators were appointed in December 2018. The company subsequently entered creditors' voluntary liquidation and was eventually dissolved in April 2025. The Gazette

Companies fail for countless legitimate reasons.

Biotechnology companies in particular can consume substantial amounts of capital before producing commercially successful products.

So Lydac's insolvency proves nothing improper.

But it becomes relevant because of what happened around it.

The company associated with Ray's earlier microvesicle science disappeared.

Ray's involvement with the science did not.

Chancellor's involvement in commercialising bioscience did not.

And eventually both men appear in senior positions around Wellbeing.

Today Wellbeing identifies Chancellor as CEO and Ray as Senior Scientific Consultant. Wellbeing International Foundation

And Wellbeing's Cell-Free Therapy continues to place extracellular vesicles and secreted biological factors at the centre of its scientific explanation.

The corporate vehicle changed.

The scientific theme remained remarkably familiar.

Then Comes the Patient Story

Against that background, the story of Max Lewinsohn becomes more interesting.

Lewinsohn publicly says that he encountered Wellbeing by chance in 2010 as a sceptical patient with a damaged knee.

He says the treatment worked for him.

He subsequently became involved commercially.

Today he is chairman. Max Lewinsohn

And Ray was telling prospective patients essentially the same story during our recorded investigation.

That gives the narrative unusual consistency.

But look at the date.

2010.

That is also approximately the period Chancellor says his own long-running scientific/commercial relationship with Ray and the German laboratory network was developing.

Companies House also records Chancellor joining Natural Biosciences in April 2010. Find and Update Company Information

So 2010 becomes an extremely important year.

Not because it proves a conspiracy.

It doesn't.

But because several strands of the modern Wellbeing story appear to converge around approximately the same period.

The Story We Need to Reconstruct

By around 2010, according to the various records and accounts we now possess:

Chancellor was moving into bioscience.

Ray was already deeply involved in cell-related and microvesicle research.

Chancellor says the relationship with the German laboratory network dates to approximately 2010/2011.

Lewinsohn says he encountered the treatment as a patient in 2010.

Ray later described Lewinsohn to a prospective patient as an original knee patient who was impressed and subsequently entered the business.

And the scientific work ultimately evolved into the treatment proposition now marketed by Wellbeing.

These aren't conclusions.

They're pieces of a chronology.

But once assembled, they demand considerably more explanation than the individual biographies provide.

Ray Wasn't the Medical Doctor

There is another crucial part of the patient journey.

Stephen Ray was often the person explaining the science to prospective patients.

During a later recorded encounter, he was asked directly whether he was a medical doctor.

His answer was unequivocal:

“No, I'm a PhD doctor.”

Asked what that meant, he said:

“I'm a neuroscientist.”

And when challenged about his role, Ray described himself as Wellbeing's Chief Scientist.

Later in the same exchange he made another important distinction:

“I don't do the medical treatment cause I'm not a doctor.”

That distinction is critical.

Ray wasn't claiming to be the physician administering the procedure.

He was presenting himself as the scientist explaining the biological rationale.

But our recordings show that he was nevertheless interacting directly with prospective patients.

What Did Ray Consider His Role?

Ray explained it himself.

During that recorded encounter he said:

“My job is really to explain the science to them and then it is up to them if they want to go ahead or not.”

He also discussed the medical information supplied by prospective patients, saying records varied: sometimes extensive records were available from the patient's doctors; sometimes there was considerably less information.

In another part of the exchange he said:

“My job is to advise patients for what these things can do and what they can't do.”

Those statements deserve careful attention.

Because there is a line between explaining science and making a clinical recommendation.

Where exactly was that line within Wellbeing?

Chancellor Wasn't the Doctor Either

Wellbeing's own current biography doesn't describe Andrew Chancellor as medically qualified.

It describes more than 30 years of business experience beginning in international banking and subsequently moving through executive recruitment before healthcare and bioscience. Wellbeing International Foundation

Yet our physical investigation found Chancellor speaking directly with prospective patients about what the treatment might do.

In the American approach examined in Chapter Two, a prospective patient described persistent pain and inflammation following a serious patella injury.

Chancellor responded by discussing inflammation and then gave an extensive explanation of how Wellbeing's preparation supposedly worked.

He subsequently said Wellbeing could arrange the blood collection and find a doctor to administer the intravenous preparation.

That is precisely why identifying the actual treating physician matters.

Who Makes the Medical Decision?

Wellbeing's current structure appears more developed.

Its public team now includes Dr Gerhard Boonstra, identified as Senior Medical Consultant and Chief Medical Officer of Allshores Medical. Wellbeing International Foundation

Wellbeing also identifies clinical personnel involved in blood collection and infusion and says its operations team coordinates treatment between the central organisation, German laboratory partner and clinician network. Wellbeing International Foundation

That is useful information.

But it doesn't completely answer the question.

For each patient, who is the physician of record?

Who independently diagnoses the condition?

Who determines whether CFT is medically appropriate?

Who considers contraindications?

Who obtains informed consent?

Who orders the procedure?

Who reviews the laboratory documentation?

Who releases the preparation for administration?

Who manages an adverse reaction?

Who holds the patient's medical record?

And who carries professional liability?

Those aren't administrative details.

They define clinical responsibility.

The Network Needs Names, Not Just Locations

Chapter Two found 23 partner clinics but only 22 publicly named geographical locations.

Chapter Three now adds another requirement.

We need the doctors.

If a patient receives CFT in Dallas, who is the responsible physician?

If the procedure occurs in London, whose medical licence covers it?

If Wellbeing arranges a doctor for a patient in America, is that physician a Wellbeing employee, an independent contractor or the operator of a partner clinic?

Does the physician independently assess the patient?

Can that physician refuse CFT even after Wellbeing's central team has accepted the enquiry?

And crucially:

who makes the final medical decision?

Two Different Stories Need to Be Separated

This investigation has also taught us an important lesson about Wellbeing's origin story.

There are actually two stories.

The first is Andrew Chancellor's.

He was a businessman who moved into bioscience and developed a long-running commercial relationship around Ray's scientific work.

That trail is documented through corporate records and Chancellor's own recorded comments.

The second is Max Lewinsohn's.

He presents himself as the sceptical patient who encountered the treatment by chance, experienced what he considered a remarkable result and eventually entered the business.

Wellbeing continues to publish that story today. Max Lewinsohn

Conflating the two weakens the investigation.

Separating them makes it stronger.

Because now we can ask a much more precise question.

How Did These Three Men Actually Come Together?

Stephen Ray brought decades of scientific work.

Andrew Chancellor brought business experience and appears in the corporate trail surrounding earlier biotechnology ventures.

Max Lewinsohn says he arrived as a patient.

Eventually:

Lewinsohn became Chairman.

Chancellor became CEO.

Ray became the senior scientific figure.

Today all three sit at the centre of the Wellbeing story.

But the documentary history behind that formation remains incomplete.

We need to establish exactly when Lewinsohn first met Ray.

When did he first meet Chancellor?

What legal entity actually treated Lewinsohn in 2010?

Was it Wellbeing International Foundation?

Was it another organisation?

Who invoiced the treatment?

Where was it performed?

Which laboratory processed his biological material?

Who administered it?

What treatment did he actually receive?

And what documentary medical evidence exists for the improvement subsequently attributed to it?

Those questions matter because the patient-to-chairman story has become part of Wellbeing's corporate credibility.

The Coincidences Should Be Tested, Not Declared Impossible

It would be tempting to look at all of this and simply say:

That cannot possibly all be coincidence.

But an investigation shouldn't do that.

Instead, we should put the dates beside one another.

2007: Ray becomes a founding director of Lydac.

2010: Chancellor becomes a director of Natural Biosciences. Find and Update Company Information

2010: Lewinsohn says he encounters the treatment as a patient “by chance.” CampdenFB

2010/2011: Chancellor later says he and Ray were already working with the German laboratory relationship.

2012: Ray leaves the Lydac board.

2014: Chancellor becomes a Lydac director. Find and Update Company Information

2016: Wellbeing says Lewinsohn joins the board following reorganisation. Max Lewinsohn

2018: Lydac enters administration while operating from 10 Harley Street. The Gazette

2020–2021: our investigators attend Wellbeing consultations at that same Harley Street address.

And today:

Lewinsohn is Chairman.

Chancellor is CEO.

Ray is Senior Scientific Consultant. Wellbeing International Foundation

We don't need to tell readers what to think about that chronology.

We need to ask Wellbeing to explain it.

Questions for Wellbeing

There are now several straightforward questions that could resolve much of this.

What legal entity provided Max Lewinsohn's treatment in 2010?

Where was that treatment performed?

When did Lewinsohn first meet Stephen Ray?

When did he first meet Andrew Chancellor?

What treatment did Lewinsohn actually receive in 2010, given that Wellbeing says its technology has evolved substantially since those early years?

When was Wellbeing International Foundation itself legally established in its current form?

What was its relationship, if any, with the earlier businesses involving Ray and Chancellor?

Why did Lydac Neuroscience and later Wellbeing operations both use 10 Harley Street?

Were the organisations commercially connected?

Did Wellbeing acquire any assets, protocols, intellectual property, equipment, data or other rights originating with Lydac?

And finally:

when a patient was sitting opposite Stephen Ray at Harley Street, which legal and medical organisation was actually responsible for them?

Follow the People

Chapter Two taught us that following the clinics wasn't enough.

Chapter Three teaches us the same lesson about job titles.

CEO.

Chairman.

Senior Scientific Consultant.

Senior Medical Consultant.

Partner physician.

Clinical consultant.

Those titles tell us who people are today.

They don't tell us how the organisation came into existence.

For that we have to follow the people backwards.

And when we do, the history doesn't begin with 23 clinics.

It doesn't begin with today's German laboratory.

And it doesn't begin with the modern Wellbeing website.

It leads backwards through Harley Street.

Through Lydac Neuroscience.

Through earlier biotechnology ventures.

Through Stephen Ray's science.

Through Andrew Chancellor's commercial involvement.

And through the extraordinary story of a man who says he arrived “by chance” as a patient in 2010 and ultimately became chairman of the organisation.

None of those facts, individually or collectively, establishes wrongdoing.

But together they create a corporate and scientific history that deserves to be documented properly.

And the next place to look is obvious.

What exactly was Wellbeing before it became Wellbeing?

Next: Chapter Four — Before Wellbeing: Reconstructing the Organisation That Came Before the Foundation

We follow the timeline backwards from Wellbeing International Foundation to the earlier companies, the people, the Harley Street addresses, the German laboratory relationships and the scientific protocols. The question is simple: was Wellbeing an entirely new organisation — or the latest chapter in a much older commercial and scientific story?