A structured way
to compare clinics.
Marketing copy blurs the differences. Structured questions clarify them. Six axes that separate a well-run regenerative program from a cash-in-hand operation.
Six questions that meaningfully separate serious clinics from the rest.
Our answers to each axis are published, so you can hold us to the same standard.
To run any clinic through this framework and see where it lands.
What to
actually compare.
Not website aesthetics, not price, not testimonials. These six axes separate clinics where the infrastructure is real from clinics where it's marketing.
Material sourcing
Named lab. Published process. Chain of custody. Material certificates available on request.
- Lab name disclosed
- Cell type & source specified
- QC & release criteria
Physician structure
Named physician. Verifiable credentials. Continuity before and after the procedure, not handed off.
- Physician name & credentials
- Pre / post continuity
- Hospital privileges
Setting & safety
Hospital-grade. Proper imaging. Resuscitation capable. Not a spa, not a storefront.
- Facility type disclosed
- Imaging & monitoring
- Adverse event plan
Pricing transparency
Prices published. Inclusions and exclusions specific. No "starting at" without ceiling.
- Full prices online
- Itemized inclusions
- Written payment terms
Outcomes honesty
Realistic, not miraculous. Non-response acknowledged. Structured follow-up. Literature cited, not glossed.
- Response ceiling disclosed
- Structured follow-up
- Declines some cases
Follow-through
Care doesn't end at discharge. Scheduled re-checks. Physician accessible. Written outcome tracking.
- 6 & 12 month reviews
- Physician-accessible
- Outcome documentation
What a serious
answer sounds like.
Good · "Umbilical MSC from [named lab]. Release criteria include viability, identity, and sterility. COA available."
Bad · "Premium stem cells from a top lab." No name, no criteria, no paper. Walk away.
Good · "Your attending is Dr. [name], [credentials], with hospital privileges at [facility]."
Bad · "Our expert physician team." If you can't name them, you can't evaluate them.
Good · Prices on the website, itemized, with inclusions and exclusions specific.
Bad · "Call for pricing." Withheld price is a negotiation tactic, not a medical standard.
Good · "Response in well-screened candidates typically lands in the 50 to 75 percent range depending on indication. We track and decline poor candidates."
Bad · "95% success rate." No such number exists honestly in this space.
Hold us to
the same standard.
We published the framework because we're willing to be measured by it. Our material sourcing, physician structure, facility, pricing, outcome position, and follow-through are all on the public site.
If a competitor does those things better, that's useful information for you. If a competitor won't answer, that's also useful information.
Nothing on this framework is proprietary. It's an adaptation of what responsible domestic specialty practices already do. The reason it feels rare in regenerative medicine is that a lot of the industry is marketing-first. Walk into the axis where a clinic is weakest and see how they respond.
Comparison
questions.
Q.01What if a clinic simply refuses to answer these questions?
Q.02Is the cheapest clinic automatically the worst?
Q.03What about outcome photos and testimonials?
Keep
reading.
Download the
checklist.
A one-page PDF of the six axes with prompt questions. Take it to any consult, including ours.