Related Experiment Videos
Selling stem cell 'treatments' as research: prospective customer perspectives from crowdfunding campaigns
1Faculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University, 8888 University Drive, Burnaby, BC V5A 1S6, Canada.
Aim:
To better understand how prospective customers interpret claims of businesses marketing unproven stem cell products that they are engaging in research activities.
Materials & Methods:
The authors examined 408 crowdfunding campaigns for unproven stem cell interventions for references to research activities.
Results:
The authors identified three overarching themes: research as a signifier of scientific credibility; the experimental nature of stem cells as a rationale for noncoverage by insurers; and contributing to the advancement of science by engaging in research.
Conclusion:
The NIH, US FDA and others should be concerned about being co-opted to misrepresent the nature of these businesses' activities. Efforts are also needed to better inform those considering purchasing unproven stem cell interventions about their relationship to legitimate research.
Insights
Businesses marketing unproven stem cell therapies often claim to be conducting research. This study found these claims are used to build credibility and justify costs, potentially misleading consumers and regulatory bodies.
Area of Science:
- Biomedical Research
- Stem Cell Science
- Health Policy
Background:
- Unproven stem cell products are marketed directly to consumers.
- Claims of research activities are frequently used in marketing these interventions.
- Understanding consumer perception of these claims is crucial.
Purpose of the Study:
- To investigate how potential customers interpret claims of research made by businesses selling unproven stem cell products.
- To analyze the role of 'research' in the marketing of unproven stem cell interventions.
Main Methods:
- Analysis of 408 crowdfunding campaigns for unproven stem cell interventions.
- Identification and thematic analysis of references to research activities within these campaigns.
Main Results:
- Three key themes emerged: research as a marker of scientific credibility, the experimental nature of stem cells as a reason for lack of insurance coverage, and engaging in research as a contribution to scientific advancement.
- Marketing claims often leverage the concept of research to legitimize unproven therapies.
Conclusions:
- Regulatory bodies like the NIH and US FDA should be vigilant against the co-option of research claims to misrepresent business activities.
- There is a need to better educate individuals considering unproven stem cell treatments about their distinction from legitimate scientific research.