Concerns have emerged regarding the practices of several UK health firms that promote tooth stem cell banking, claiming it can treat conditions such as diabetes and autism. An investigation led by Emma Wilkinson and published in the BMJ revealed that companies are capitalizing on parental hopes, generating significant revenue through these misleading assertions.
Tooth stem cell banking, also referred to as dental pulp cell banking, involves parents sending their children’s lost milk teeth to laboratories for stem cell harvesting. The service is offered by three companies: BioEden, Future Health Biobank, and Stem Protect. The cost is approximately £1,900, with an additional annual storage fee of £95.
On its website, Future Health Biobank claims to have released 26 tooth stem cell samples for various treatments, including for autism and type 1 diabetes. Meanwhile, Stem Protect asserts that tooth stem cells can assist in addressing cleft palate repair and HIV/AIDS. The firm suggests that “medical trials into autism and cerebral palsy involve the pulp found inside teeth and offer hope for hundreds of conditions.” BioEden has described stem cell therapy as the “next frontier” for both type 1 and type 2 diabetes, claiming to have observed remarkable developments among its clientele.
Despite these claims, experts have raised substantial doubts regarding the medical efficacy of tooth stem cell banking. Jill Shepherd, a senior lecturer in stem cell biology at the University of Kent, stated, “There is a lack of evidence and a paucity of research using dental pulp stem cells to treat patients.” She emphasized that there is no proof to support the idea that stem cells sourced from a child’s milk tooth would ever be necessary for treating that child.
The uncertainties surrounding the efficacy of these treatments are further highlighted by Sufyan Hussain, an investigator involved in a global clinical trial assessing stem cell therapy. He noted the absence of a definitive answer regarding the best source of stem cells for future diabetes therapies. “This highlights how emotive this matter can be,” Hussain said. “While we remain hopeful about future treatments, there is also a risk that companies might exploit these hopes to generate additional revenue.”
Critics have voiced their concerns about the ethical implications of marketing tooth stem cell procedures to parents, particularly with claims of treating conditions like autism. Tim Nicholls, assistant director of policy, research and strategy at the National Autistic Society, labeled these claims as “outrageous.” He pointed out that autism is not an illness that can be treated, stating, “It is dangerous and morally bankrupt to target potentially vulnerable people with expensive procedures that could, in fact, cause harm.”
In response to the findings published in the BMJ, Future Health Biobank acknowledged the need to reassess how information is presented on its website, aiming to clarify the distinction between client experiences and formally published clinical outcomes. A spokesperson for Stem Protect maintained that the company has not made any unfounded claims and emphasized that its website has received approval from the Human Tissue Authority. They reiterated their commitment to ensuring that stem cell banking is presented as a valuable resource, underpinned by evidence and transparency.
As the investigation continues to unfold, both parents and medical professionals are urged to approach these claims with caution, prioritizing informed decisions in the face of potentially misleading marketing practices.
