ArticleBMC medical ethics2020
The law and problematic marketing by private umbilical cord blood banks.
Article in BMC medical ethics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Human stewardship in the age of organoids.Nature methods · 2026Article
- Translational Potential of Stem Cell-based Therapies in the Treatment of Neonatal Hypoxic-ischemic Brain Injury.Stem cell reviews and reports · 2025Review
- Ethical considerations for advancing research using organoid models derived from the placenta.Human reproduction update · 2025Review
- Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices of Pregnant Women and Hospital Staff Regarding Umbilical Cord Blood Banking: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Cord blood banking: Balancing hype and hope in stem cell therapy.European journal of midwifery · 2024Article
- Fresh Umbilical Cord Blood-A Source of Multipotent Stem Cells, Collection, Banking, Cryopreservation, and Ethical Concerns.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Regenerative Medicine: Case Study for Understanding and Anticipating Emerging Science and Technology.NAM perspectives · 2023Review
- Umbilical Cord Blood Banking: An Update For Childbirth Educators.The Journal of perinatal education · 2022Article
- Peddling promise? An analysis of private umbilical cord blood banking company websites in Canada.Cell and tissue banking · 2021Article
- Lack of information about umbilical cord blood banking leads to decreased donation rates among Brazilian pregnant women.Cell and tissue banking · 2021Article
- Stem cell preservation for regenerative therapies: ethical and governance considerations for the health care sector.NPJ Regenerative medicine · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPrivate umbilical cord blood banking is a for-profit industry in which parents pay to store blood for potential future use. Governments have noted the tendency for private banks to oversell the potential for cord blood use, especially in relation to speculative cell therapies not yet supported by clinical evidence. We assessed the regulatory landscape governing private cord bank marketing in Canada. MAIN BODY: Because the problematic marketing of private cord blood banking for future use often relates to speculative future cell therapies that do not exist and are not being advertised for current clinical use, most private blood bank marketing seems to fall outside Health Canada's regulatory scope. However, this problematic marketing is regulated by the Competition Bureau pursuant to the Competition Act. While representations relating to future hypothetical treatments may not always be subject to the legal requirement for claim substantiation, the law also prohibits individuals and companies from knowingly or recklessly making representations that are "false or misleading in a material respect." A representation is materially false or misleading when it could "influence a consumer's behavior or purchasing decisions," and consumers are likely to be considered to be "credulous and inexperienced" for the purposes of assessing an advertisement's general impression. Because all of the potential benefit of the banking is derived from the potential future use of the biological material for health interventions directed toward the customers and their relatives, and because we know the best available medical evidence indicates a very low probability of utility in this context, we can say with confidence that some private cord blood banking claims are materially misleading. Moreover, to the extent that medical professionals are involved in private bank interactions with customers or hold ownership stakes in private banks, they are subject to professional codes, standards of practice, and potentially fiduciary obligations that further prohibit misleading marketing.
conclusionsPrivate cord blood bank marketing that advertises hypothetical future treatments can be misleading and may influence consumer behaviour. This marketing may breach existing advertising law. Regulatory bodies should enforce the law in order to help prevent public health and personal financial harm.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.