Readers of The Niche will probably recall that I’ve been critical of Google Search on stem cells.
The search engine giant does unintended promotion of unproven stem cells and the clinics that sell them, like a Ukrainian clinic whose website Google still seems to view as the world’s expert on stem cells for autism, which, incidentally, is still a totally unproven approach. See the screenshot below.
Google Search also has made an unproven Caribbean stem cell clinic’s website the king of vast amounts of its stem cell search results. Why does that make sense? In addition, I recently discussed the worrisome performance of Google AI search overviews on stem cell questions.
This puzzling behavior by Google Search is counterintuitive. It’s also a public health issue. These searches are not about shoes, chocolate, or the best hat stores in Walla Walla, Wa. They are about stuff being injected into people’s bodies.
Today’s post is a new twist on this important topic related to AI that provides Google Search with a framework for doing much better. If it cares to do so. The source might surprise you. Maybe it is one that Google will trust more than me.
Why do I say that?
I asked Google’s own Gemini tool about why Google Search results promote unproven stem cell clinics and how Google Search could do better.
The results were surprisingly blunt and insightful.
Google Search results are still risky on many stem cell queries
The first thing I did recently was compare Google Search’s results now as compared to the last few years. No improvement.
In a search for “stem cells for neuropathy”, Google ranks DVC Stem, a Caribbean stem cell clinic as #1.
Google Search seems particularly taken with DVC Stem as this clinic’s website has gobbled up a massive slice of all major Google searches related to stem cells in the last few years. This dominance even includes stem cell searches having seemingly little or nothing to do with what DVC Stem is marketing.
DVC seems to be like a horse whisperer for Google.
But it’s not just them. Many other unproven clinics do great with Google Search too.
Google’s Gemini on Google Search regarding stem cells
After doing some of these searches again on Google now, I thought I’d see what Google’s AI tool Gemini “thinks” about this situation.
Gemini was so refreshing. It was consistently and appropriately cautious in answers to questions I gave it about stem cells for various conditions including autism and CP.
Then I asked Gemini about the apparent paradox between its caution versus the high ranking by Google Search of unproven stem cell clinic websites. Gemini’s answer was on the money about likely weaknesses of Google Search on stem cell queries. You can see a screenshot of some of the Gemini answer above.
For example, Google’s own Gemini pointed out that clinic websites’ use of optimistic text could be a factor in Google Search ranking those sites so highly. Shouldn’t Google Search not be so easily swayed by arguably unwarranted certainty and cheeriness on unproven medical offerings like many kinds of stem cells? I would have thought so.
Gemini also highlighted how powerful SEO (certain kinds of optimization of your website, like how it looks and runs) can be even when a site is marketing scientifically unproven medical offerings.
The implication is that SEO even for medical searches like on stem cells for health issues could overpower more important Google Search ranking factors like accuracy and a strong biomedical research basis. I don’t see that the clinics have globally-recognized expertise either.
Further, shouldn’t obvious marketing of unproven medical offerings on a website be an overriding negative Google SEO factor for a website? Of course, but it isn’t now. Many clinic websites have buttons all over for visitors to become their customers for unproven cell injections. Are those invisible to Google?
Gemini’s advice for Google Search
Then, I asked Gemini to give Google Search advice on all of this. Here’s what Gemini said Google Search should do better:
“Addressing the issue of unproven stem cell clinics ranking highly in Google Search results is a complex challenge, but here are some recommendations for Google Search to consider:
- Enhanced Fact-Checking and Medical Information Verification:
- Implement more robust fact-checking mechanisms specifically for medical information, particularly concerning stem cell therapies.
- Partner with reputable medical organizations and experts to verify the claims made by clinics and websites.
- Develop algorithms that can identify and flag websites that make unsubstantiated or misleading medical claims.
- Prioritizing Evidence-Based Information:
- Adjust ranking algorithms to prioritize results from established medical institutions, peer-reviewed journals, and government health agencies.
- Give greater weight to websites that adhere to evidence-based medicine principles and provide transparent information about their sources.
- Consider implementing a “medical information quality score” that assesses the credibility of websites based on their adherence to scientific standards.
- Clear Labeling and Warnings:
- Introduce clear labels or warnings for search results that may contain unproven or potentially harmful medical information.
- Provide users with contextual information about the risks and limitations of stem cell therapies.
- Direct users to reliable sources of information, such as government health websites and medical associations.
- Strengthening Advertising Policies:
- Enforce stricter advertising policies for stem cell clinics, prohibiting the promotion of unproven or misleading treatments.
- Require clinics to provide evidence of scientific validation for their therapies before they can advertise on Google.
- Increase scrutiny of ads that target vulnerable populations or make exaggerated claims.
- User Education and Awareness:
- Develop educational resources and tools to help users critically evaluate medical information online.
- Provide clear guidelines on how to identify reliable sources of medical information.
- Promote awareness of the risks associated with unproven stem cell therapies.
- Reporting and Feedback Mechanisms:
- Implement robust reporting mechanisms that allow users to flag websites or ads that promote unproven medical treatments.
- Actively monitor user feedback and take appropriate action to address reported issues.
- Algorithm updates:
- Increase the algorithms ability to detect language that is designed to prey on vulnerable people.
- Increase the algorithms ability to detect websites that are trying to sell medical treatments, versus websites that are trying to provide information.
- Collaboration with Regulatory Bodies:
- Work closely with regulatory bodies like the FDA and other international organizations to identify and address the issue of unproven stem cell clinics.
By implementing these recommendations, Google Search can play a crucial role in protecting users from misinformation and promoting access to accurate, evidence-based medical information.”
Wow. The only “oops” was that Google already does not accept stem cell clinic advertising.
Looking ahead: will one part of Google take advice from another?
Overall, this is an impressive list from Gemini.
So, folks at Google Search will you listen to Gemini even if not to me? How can you argue with the logic of Gemini’s list?
I hope we see some of Gemini’s recommendations reflected in search results on stem cell therapies in the near future.
So do report when and where SC treatments have been unsafe and /or inefficient. Do an RWE study showing how many are unhappy with results. Why not approve more “right to try” for those with autoimmune diseases with no hope and early death and pain. And so few Phase 2 & 3 Clinical Trials.
You and FDA could care less how many people have improved health with stem cell and exosome treatment. Can you tell me why there are few if any Phase 3 Clinical Trials? Why not do a Real World Study of people like myself who have had positive results and “money well spent” It seems to me that maximizing the Paracrine Effect should be the goal.
Do you know what the Paracrine Effect is? Do you have to know how a motor works to drive a car?