Just over 20 years ago, the stem cell research promised a revolution against disease and aging. These master cells, with the potential to become any tissue in the body, seemed the key to true regenerative medicine, something that It moved away from the complex reality that we have inside our body. Although there are different merchants who try to sell us stem cells as a true wonder.
Distorted. Something we are accustomed to (unfortunately) is that where science hits the brakes, the market hits the accelerator. In the infinite Amazon showcase, next to the vitamins and the collagen supplementsa new family of miracle products has emerged: stem cell supplements. Of course, they cannot contain cells in a capsule or in a cream, but that does not promise them to stimulate or regenerate them. Something that for many is the most ideal.
This is something that a group from the Health Law Institute of the University of Alberta (Canada) has decided to investigate. has put the magnifying glass on this emerging market. To do this, it analyzed 184 of these products from 133 different companies associated with Amazon.com and has been able to conclude that behind an apparent scientific rhetoric hides a deliberate strategy to avoid regulation and deceive the consumer.
The trick. The study published in the journal Stem Cell Reports shows how the sellers of these supplements exploit a legal loophole that allows them to launch ambiguous health messages without the need to demonstrate their effectiveness. The labels carefully avoid terms such as ‘cure’ or ‘prevent’ diseases, something that legislation prohibits. Instead, they use harmless verbs like “support,” “promote,” or “maintain” brain health, energy, or healthy aging.
This ambiguity is its main weapon. In the United States and Canada, regulations allow calls structure/function claimswhich are vague claims that link a product to overall well-being without requiring rigorous clinical testing. That loophole is where most of these supplements slip through.
The data. They can be summarized in several points:
- More than 40% of products explicitly mentioned “science” or “scientific evidence” to support the features they promised.
- 35% included references to health professionals or scientists to reinforce legitimacy.
- 94% of the supplements made promises related to specific ailments by pointing out that they were anti-aging, strengthened immunity or increased the consumer’s energy.
This type of marketing, which the authors call scienceploitation (exploitation of science), “gives the consumer the impression that there is broad scientific support, which contrasts with the current state of stem cell therapies,” the study warns.
Regulation. The strategy works because regulation in North America barely requires testing for safety or efficiency before a supplement hits the market. In theory, public bodies can sanction misleading advertising, but their oversight capacity is minimal. In the United States alone, it is estimated that there are more than 100,000 supplements in circulation.
In practice, you only have to add a phrase that is “this statement has not been evaluated by the FDA” for pseudoscience to become legal. In Canada, although a license from Health Canada is required, a 2021 audit found that the agency did “little” to prevent poor consumer information from being provided.
The case in Spain. Although the study in question focuses on the United States and Canada, its conclusions can be extrapolated. In Spain, any statement about health must be authorized by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) or the Spanish Agency for Medicines and Health Products (AEMPS). However, law enforcement on the internet is often very lax, and on Amazon.es you can find products with language very similar to that reported by researchers.
Products on Amazon.es that promise anti-aging effects thanks to the stem cells they contain.
The authors of the work, led by Alessandro R. Marcon and Timothy Caulfield, warn that this situation not only harms consumers’ pockets, but also erodes trust in science and real research on stem cells. Selling products without a scientific basis under the umbrella of biotechnology is, they conclude, a form of marketing that exploits the prestige gained by science to sell smoke.
GIPHY App Key not set. Please check settings