1. That was a "news" piece written by Charles Schmidt, a freelance writer, for Nature Biotechnology, not a scientific article written for Science. http://www.schmidtwriting.com/
2. Even so, Mr. Schmidt was balanced in comparing laViv to other wrinkle treatments. If you actually read the article, you might see this statement from Dr. Munavalli:
"There's a certain comfort that people take from using their own constituent cells instead of some artificial approach, and the effect also seems to longer lasting."
"Indeed patchy regulatory oversight of the field means that cosmetic cell therapy faces an uphill battle for legitimacy. In this respect, Jeffrey Kenkel, president of the American Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery, says that Fibrocell's FDA approval marks a step forward for the industry."
The article also mentioned that, in the entire history of FDA, only three cellular therapies were approved, Carticel for knee injuries, Provenge for prostate cancer and now laViv for wrinkle treatment. This stamp of approval set laViv apart from all other questionable therapies such as fat cells or stem cells transplants.
laViv is the only known therapy of wrinkles that actually keeps on improving with time unlike any other dermal filler that starts fading as soon as the treatment finishes. Here's a patient's testimony that her laViv treatment lasted 7 years: