May 2009

Special Edition



In This Issue

·         Yesteryear’s News Sold as Today’s Miracle

·         Dogs Yes, People No

·         These Five Men

·         Why Not the Best?

·         An RSCI First


Science Advisory Board

Roberto Jorge Fernandez Viña, MD

Honorary Professor University Maimonides Argentina Honorary Professor University of Beijing, China


Shimon Slavin, MD
Deputy Chairman

Professor of Medicine Medical & Scientific Director
International Center for Cell Therapy & Cancer (ICTC) Tel Aviv Medical Center


Carlos Lima, MD
Senior Consultant Neuropathology Hospital Egas Moniz, Portugal


Zannos G. Grekos, MD
Director of Cardiology and Vascular Diseases, Regenocyte Theraputic
Assistant Clinical Professor of Cardiology, Nova Southeastern University


Kitipan V. Arom, MD, PhD, FACS, FACC, FACCP, FRCST
Chairman Emeritus
President of the Society of Thoracic Surgeons of Thailand
Minneapolis Heart Institute & Minneapolis Heart Institution Foundation, USA
Founder and Past President Minnesota Society of Thoracic Surgeons, USA

Don Margolis
Founder and Chairman
Bangkok, Thailand


Only when one eye is blind behind rose colored glasses, can yesteryear’s news be sold as today’s miracle. 

The North American and European print media are still exercising the attributes of denial, ignorance and selective consideration when researching and writing the headlines and stories about stem cell treatment victories.  Let me sum up the media flurry of the past 5 years when it comes to stem cell treatment articles. 

  1. Embryonic stem cells (ESC) show incredible treatment potential!
  2. ESC are moments away from curing hundreds of disease!
  3. Adult stem cells (ASC) are severely limited in their ability to help people.
  4. The thousands of cases of beneficial results from ASC outside the US were ALL flukes or not real, but merely thousands of “Placebo Effects.”


Let’s review the facts:

·         To date, ESC HAVE NOT successfully completed one real clinical trial or even one serious test on a group of animals, for ANY disease EVER!

·         To date, ASC HAVE treated thousands of people around the world, suffering from 100+ so-called incurable diseases…and treated them SUCCESSFULLY!


For five years, I read about breakthroughs, miracles and potentials happening in the US with adult stem cells.  I should be glad.  But how could I be when the overriding rule in American newspapers is never to allow the word “adult” to precede the words “stem cells” in such articles, thereby convincing the kept-ignorant public that such victories were from ESC research.


The print media constantly extol the virtues of ESC research producing cures. 


Thankfully, they are beginning to wise up and listen to some of the greatest ESC scientists in the world who have clearly stated that there will be NO treatments from ESC for 10, 20, even 50 years.




Now they are starting to sneak in the correct type of stem cells in their “victory,” “breakthrough” and “miracle” articles.  The only problem is, they are missing the dates…by years.  Virtually every one of the advances currently promoted in major print media has already occurred in multiple countries outside the US…years ago.


The latest example is from an article entitled, “Healing the Heart with Bone-Marrow Cells.”  The subtitle is, “A new treatment may help angina sufferers who are resistant to surgery and medication.”  This is a NEW treatment?  Let’s see…



2001 – Human studies and trials using adult stem cells to re-grow muscle tissue, including cardiac muscle tissue, were begun in many countries around the world.


2002 – In Rotterdam, a patient gets stem cells injected through a catheter into the wall of his heart. Results are improved ejection fractions, reduced diameters, thicker muscle tissue.


2003 – The American Heart Association accepted and publicized the greatest heart clinical trial in history—out of Brazil.  Dying transplant candidates were brought back to near-normal lives---and American medical “science” ignored it, as they were instructed by their Lords and Masters. 


2004 – The first-ever commercial stem cell treatment center in the world is Healing the Heart with Autologous (from the patient’s body) Stem Cells and re-growing human cardiac muscle tissue in hundreds of patients.  Their procedures are based on a clinical trial that proved that their adult stem cells helped angina sufferers who are resistant to surgery and medication.  Sound familiar? But their 2005-06 scientific paper was accepted by the American Heart Association in the middle of the five year period 2004-2008 when Adult Stem Cell victories were (and still are) all but banned from American “Medical” Journals.  This means that today, five years too late, it is NEWS in the Developed World!


2009 – Present day.  There are currently dozens of stem cell treatment centers around the world who are Healing the Heart with Bone-Marrow Cells and using adult stem cells to treat human patients and re-grow both cardiac and skeletal muscle tissue and more.



This “breakthrough” is not NEW.  One must blatantly ignore/disregard almost a decade of medical history and thousands of successful treatments around the world to call it new.  One must completely rewrite history, turning a blind eye to the past and then falsely glamorize this accomplishment as “news.”  In other words…


“Only when one eye is blind behind rose colored glasses, can yesterday’s news become today’s miracle.”


It is time to put a stop to these purposely deceitful articles about stem cell facts, history and available treatments.  North America is now, and will be, the Bangladesh of stem cell science as long as the huge medical businesses which control 80% of Congress, 90% of scientists, and 100% of the White House and the FDA are in charge, which means at least for YOUR lifetime.



For 12 other articles about revolutionary cardiac advances that are 4-6 years late:





Dogs Yes, People No

"There are other possibilities out there besides pills or a doctor's knife,"


This is a story about a dog named Rusty and her owner, whom we’ll call Mrs. Spring.


One day last fall, Rusty started limping — which was odd because the German shepherd seemed fit and was not yet four years old. "She wasn't recovering as quickly as normal from a trek in the park,” remarked Spring.


In fact, Rusty had hip dysplasia.  The cure — a complete hip replacement — would keep Rusty in recovery for up to six months. Rusty's regular veterinarian sent Mrs. Spring to see another local vet who was trained in acupuncture, to treat Rusty's pain. But that lady had a better idea. She offered a state-of-the-art stem-cell transplant, a therapy not yet available to humans that would potentially help Rusty's hip repair itself.


The treatment took just two days. She injected them into Rusty's failing hip, where they adapted and developed into the healthy cartilage and tendon cells the animal needed. Within 36 hours, "Rusty was moving well, and you could see an ease in her gait," says Mrs. Spring. For now, Rusty is fully cured and back to running and swimming and playing with her friends.


"There are other possibilities out there besides pills or a doctor's knife," says the veterinary oncologist who incorporated alternative treatments into her practice four years ago.


Most progressive veterinary therapies are inspired by human health care. Burton Miller, who runs the Animal Wellness Center in Huntington Station, N.Y., became a practitioner of Eastern medicine for animals after suffering a skiing accident in 1996. He began reading up on alternative therapies for his injury and decided to apply the same kind of medicine to his animal patients. "I announced to my [clients] that everything I had ever told them was wrong," he says. Those pet owners promptly abandoned him, but today he has a thriving practice in which acupuncture and homeopathic medicines are the most common courses of treatment. (A veterinary visit including acupuncture with Miller costs $65 — about what a human acupuncturist in Manhattan charges.)


Unlike these older, more popular therapies, some vets now offer better medicine to animals than are allowed and available to their owners, even though they do not use controversial embryonic stem cells!  The fatty-tissue stem-cell transplant has not yet secured FDA approval for use in humans, but pets in droves are reaping the benefits. This movement to beneficial treatment without pills and scalpels is led by a company called Vet-Stem. Since it began offering its online certification course in January, more than 1,000 vets have signed up to take it, many at the urging of their patients' owners. The FDA has so far approved the treatment for animals' orthopedic problems in tendons and ligaments, and for bone fractures and arthritis. Vet-Stem says that some of its patients begin to show increased mobility and decreased sensitivity at the location of the injury the same day and most improve within a week. About 20% see no progress at all.  Vet-Stem has not received reports of any negative effects and this is not surprising, as they saw no negative effects in their clinical trials.


A cycle of stem-cell treatment generally costs $2,000 to $4,000, including the extraction, surgeries and follow-up. Canine hip-replacement surgeries, however, can be about four times as expensive. Robert Harman, Vet-Stem's founder, says that he initially thought wealthy horse owners would be his primary clientele. "Turns out there's not quite the same emotional attachment to horses as in the small-animal world," Harman says. "It used to be if your dog got sick, you just got a new dog. Now people want the best care."


At the start of the year, Vet-Stem's patient pool was 90% horses and 10% dogs. By the end of 2008, Harman estimates those numbers will shift to 60% dogs, 10% cats and 30% horses — no doubt aided by word-of-mouth praise from pet owners like Mrs. Spring. "It's comforting for me to know I've done what I can to alleviate Rusty's pain," Mrs. Spring says. "She loves to play so much that fixing her hip really improved both our qualities of life."

For eleven other dog, horse and mountain lion stem cell treatment stories, including:

“Will Rover Outlive Grandma?”

“Horsing Around With Stem Cells”

“Rover’s Do Over”





“To summarize,” said Mr. Margolis, “these five men have improved the lives of more ‘untreatable’ patients than all of the world’s thousands of embryonic doctors and scientists combined---and that will still be true a decade from now!”


This was the closing quote in RSCI’s May 27 press release announcing the appointments of Dr. Roberto Fernandez-Vina as Chairman of the Institute’s Science Advisory Board and Dr. Shimon Slavin as Deputy Chairman.


No other institution and no commercial company has the credentials of RSCI’s scientists all in one place.  Five men, all having a world-first in stem cells to his credit.


To read the full article:






I first discovered The Commonwealth Fund in 2006.  Like most Americans, I was brainwashed to believe that our medical system was number one, yet as I got deeper into medicine from 2003-06, I saw so many holes and so many cover-up lies, that I started looking for the real truth.  Here is what I found.  Know that what you are about to read in this Part One is the good news, though you won’t believe that when you read it.


The emphases are mine.




The Commonwealth Fund


Why Not the Best?


Results from a National Scorecard on U.S. Health System Performance


September 20, 2006 | Volume 34


Authors: The Commonwealth Fund Commission on a High Performance Health System


Scorecard Overview


Created by the Commonwealth Fund Commission on a High Performance Health System, the National Scorecard on U.S. Health System Performance is the first-ever comprehensive means of measuring and monitoring health care outcomes, quality, access, efficiency, and equity in one report. Its findings indicate that America's health system falls far short of what is attainable, especially given the resources the nation invests. Across 37 indicators of performance, the U.S. achieves an overall score of 66 out of a possible 100 when comparing actual national performance to achievable benchmarks. Scores on efficiency are particularly low. This report explains how the Scorecard works, describes results for each domain of performance, and discusses implications for policies to improve quality, access, and cost performance.


These findings are also discussed in a Health Affairs Web Exclusive.


Executive Summary


Once upon a time, it was taken as an article of faith among most Americans that the U.S. health care system was simply the best in the world. Yet growing evidence indicates the system falls short given the high level of resources committed to health care. Although national health spending is significantly higher than the average rate of other industrialized countries, the U.S. is the only industrialized country that fails to guarantee universal health insurance and coverage is deteriorating, leaving millions without affordable access to preventive and essential health care. Quality of care is highly variable and delivered by a system that is too often poorly coordinated, driving up costs, and putting patients at risk. With rising costs straining family, business, and public budgets, access deteriorating and variable quality, improving health care performance is a matter of national urgency.


The Commonwealth Fund Commission on a High Performance Health System has developed a National Scorecard on U.S. Health System Performance (see the table below for scores on 37 key indicators). The Scorecard assesses how well the U.S. health system is performing as a whole relative to what is achievable. It provides benchmarks for the nation and a mechanism for monitoring change over time across core health care system goals of health outcomes, quality, access, efficiency, and equity.


Scores come from ratios that compare the U.S. national average performance to benchmarks, which represent top performance. If performance in the U.S. was uniform for each of the health system goals, and if, in those instances in which U.S. performance can be compared with other countries, we were consistently at the top, the average score for the U.S. would be 100. But, the U.S. as a whole scores an average of 66. Several different measures or indicators were examined for each of the goal areas and dimensions of health system performance. There are wide gaps between national average rates and benchmarks in each of the dimensions of the Scorecard, with U. S. average scores ranging from 51 to 71.


By showing the gaps between national performance and benchmarks that have been achieved, the Scorecard offers performance targets for improvement. And it provides a foundation for the development of public and private policy action, and a yardstick against which to measure the success of new policies.


Scorecard Highlights and Leading Indicators

The table summarizes U.S. average rates on 37 indicators, their benchmark comparison rates—typically those achieved by the top 10 percent of countries, states, health plans, hospitals, or other providers—and the U.S. average score, calculated as the ratio between U.S. performance and benchmark rate. In just a few instances the benchmarks represent targets, rather than achieved top performance. The sources of the benchmarks are shown in the table.


Some major findings include:


Long, Healthy, and Productive Lives: Total Average Score 69


    * The U.S. is one-third worse than the best country on mortality from conditions "amenable to health care"—that is, deaths that could have been prevented with timely and effective care. Its infant mortality rate is 7.0 deaths per 1,000 live births, compared with 2.7 in the top three countries. The U.S. average adult disability rate is one-fourth worse than the best five U.S. states, as is the rate of children missing 11 or more days of school because of illness or injury.


Quality: Total Average Score 71


    * Despite documented benefits of timely preventive care, barely half of adults (49%) received preventive and screening tests according to guidelines for their age and sex.

    * The current gap between national average rates of diabetes and blood pressure control and rates achieved by the top 10 percent of health plans translates into an estimated 20,000 to 40,000 preventable deaths and $1 billion to $2 billion in avoidable medical costs.

    * Only half of patients with congestive heart failure receive written discharge instructions regarding care following their hospitalization.

    * Nursing home hospital admission and readmission rates in the bottom 10 percent of states are two times higher than in the top 10 percent of states.


Access: Total Average Score 67


    * In 2003, one-third (35%) of adults under 65 (61 million) were either underinsured or were uninsured at some time during the year.

    * One-third (34%) of all adults under 65 have problems paying their medical bills or have medical debt they are paying off over time. And premiums are increasingly stretching median household incomes.


Efficiency: Total Average Score 51


    * National preventable hospital admissions for patients with diabetes, congestive heart failure, and asthma (ambulatory care sensitive conditions) were twice the level achieved by the top states.

    * Hospital 30-day readmission rates for Medicare patients ranged from 14 percent to 22 percent across regions. Bringing readmission rates down to the levels achieved by the top performing regions would save Medicare $1.9 billion annually.

    * Annual Medicare costs of care average $32,000 for patients with congestive heart failure, diabetes, and chronic lung disease, with a twofold spread in costs across geographic regions.

    * As a share of total health expenditures, U.S. insurance administrative costs were more than three times the rates of countries with the most integrated insurance systems.

Ed note: this is because the insurance companies take out 25% of your premiums as profits…dm


    * The U.S. lags well behind other nations in use of electronic medical records: 17 percent of U.S doctors compared with 80 percent in the top three countries.


Equity: Total Average Score: 71


    * On multiple indicators across quality of care and access to care, there is a wide gap between low-income or uninsured populations and those with higher incomes and insurance. On average, low-income and uninsured rates would need to improve by one-third to close the gap.

    * On average, it would require a 20 percent decrease in Hispanic risk rates to reach benchmark white rates on key indicators of quality, access, and efficiency. Hispanics are at particularly high risk of being uninsured, lacking a regular source of primary care, and not receiving essential preventive care.

    * Overall, it would require a 24 percent or greater improvement in African American mortality, quality, access, and efficiency indicators to approach benchmark white rates. Blacks are much more likely to die at birth or from chronic conditions such as heart disease and diabetes. Blacks also have significantly lower rates of cancer survival.

Ed note:  NOT because they are black, but because they are poor….dm




Despite the fact that the “US Health Expenditures as a % of their GDP” is almost the highest in the world (there is only one that spends more), we have all of the above problems with our health care system and even the World Health Organization (WHO) ranks the US:

  • health system at 37th in the world
  • life expectancy at 30th in the world
  • infant mortality at 34th in the world


The system is not working.













American doctors have been so horribly misinformed about stem cells by those who run the “Business of Medicine” that there is little chance they will ever know the whole truth.  Why? Because virtually all stem cell articles printed in North America, and most articles in Europe from 2004 through 2008, have been lie-filled efforts to keep profitable patients away from stem cells that could reduce the $2 billion dollar WEEKLY profits of the “Business of Medicine” in North America alone.



The multi-billion dollar campaign has brainwashed us to “Ask Your Doctor” and is working well.  Those doctors who know nothing are only too happy to push the pharmaceutical industry’s agenda and bolster the party-line to their trusting and unsuspecting patients.  So patients are led to NOT get better, but to continue to suffer even more years with toxic pills and useless therapies to treat diseases that are incurable ONLY in a medical system that allows no cures!  In fact, if you started to collect your Social Security this year, you were only six years old when American Medical Science conquered its last disease.  Since then, not a single additional disease has been cured!



“…since few people can afford to travel outside the country for adult stem cell treatments, ESC-crazed America, the Bangladesh of stem cells, with its focus on “treatment useless” research, and 4-8 years behind the rest of the world on available adult stem cell treatments, has become exactly that, a death row prison cell for those suffering from so-called untreatable diseases.”


Today, no American scientist or doctor dares to cure anything that will reduce those profits of his Lords & Masters.  But YOU can dare!  This issue’s “Final Note” article above is the first of four parts describing exactly why your medical system is the worst in the developed world.  “Why Not the Best?” was written by the only organization in the world capable of judging medical systems accurately, The Commonwealth Fund. 


Once you understand how ineffective the US medical system is, you will know what you need to do.  You must defend yourself and your loved ones from a “Death Row” system that insists you stay home, take drug after drug and die slowly and uncomfortably, rather than recover.  IF you can both accept this fact AND dare to seek out the best care, you will be prepared with the knowledge of alternative options when your loved one is told “There is nothing we can do.” 


The key video (of four in the DVD) is a complete explanation of why there will never be a disease treated with embryonic stem cells in your lifetime, despite what the con men in California and the politicians tell you.  Here are the opening two minutes of script:





1.       Referring back to Stem Cells 101, we learned how Adult Stem Cells, which we prefer to call REPAIR STEM CELLS, when sent to a part of the body that needs help, stay there and duplicate themselves until there are enough to repair a problem quickly, like in weeks.  That is why we call them Repair stem cells---that is what they do---that is what they are.


2.       Embryonic pitchmen pretend that their stem cells hold more “promise,” saying they can become anything and Repair Stem Cells Cannot.  Nothing could possibly be further from the truth. Knowing full well that they are not able to produce one EMBRYONIC STEM CELL which can safely be put into a human and reduce the symptoms of a disease, they deny the truth, thus denying YOU of treatments that work today while you wait for their 21st century alchemy to turn embryonic LEAD into Repair Stem Cell GOLD.


3.       Repair Stem Cells are right now being used to successfully treat over 100 diseases. Embryonics? Zero. Nada. Rien. Nichts. Nichevo.


4.       This video will show you why the EMBRYONIC STEM CELLS always fail to repair.


Other lessons on the DVD are

            Stem Cells 101 condensed into 16 minutes.

            Dr. Carlos Lima & Christopher Reeve

            The Embryonic “Promise.”


STEM CELLS 102 can be purchased for $19.34 + S&H starting June 15 on this website (RSCI) and others.




More Real Names of Real People in recovery.

Part 2 of “Why not the Best?”

Introducing the finest children’s book on stem cells.

And more


USA Direct Line:
Tel. +1­ 214 ­556 ­6377

Don Margolis, Chairman
The Repair Stem Cell Institute
PT Court
1 Rangnam Rd., Phayathai
Bangkok, 10400
The Voice of Stem Cell Science
Don Margolis’ Personal Blog


This Newsletter is for educational purposes only and not to be taken as medical advice.

For the names of the Treatment Centers and their expert stem cell doctors qualified enough to make our list (less than 4% of the world's stem cell treatment centers), go to

We provide the contact information; the doctors provide the medical advice.