Krystal Jacques completed her Master’s degree in the Institute of Medical Science department at the University of Toronto. For her Master’s she studied the embryonic origin of pancreatic stem cells under the supervision of Dr. Derek van der Kooy, where she developed an interest in both photography and science communication. She is currently building her own business as an artist. As a scientist turned artist, she hopes that she can tell stories through visual and written media. You can find Krystal on Instagram @krystaljacques
Photo courtesy of Anna Shvets, Pexels
Evidence over the past few decades has shown that skin stem/progenitor cells play the most essential role in tissue regeneration of skin. The popular press’ excitement over what a stem cell can do to fight or reverse aging has sparked the imagination of the public and encouraged them to seek stem cell-based products and clinical treatments for cosmetic purposes.
The beauty and cosmetic industry is currently worth more than $511 billion, and much of its success is due to marketing and advertising involving the use of influencers/social media as well as a growing demand for skin care products. As you may have noticed, a lot of the industry’s marketing comes down to its specific use of language. Cosmetic products and treatments that reportedly use stem cells, or stem cell extracts to address the signs of aging, offer credibility to evidence-based and non-evidence-based claims. In fact, the use of “stem cell” may confer to the reader that this product must be science-based, and therefore most likely works.
Due to the nature and success of stem cell research, and the important role that science plays in society, it is hardly surprising that the beauty industry capitalizes on the language used in science. This phenomenon has been called “scienceploitation.” This is just a part of a larger trend whereby language is leveraged by the market to sell products.
In the cosmetic industry, words such as self-renewal, self-renewing, regeneration and anti-aging, are sprinkled throughout copy written by cosmetic marketers to show that a given product offers a solution to aging skin and other skin concerns. This is not to say that the use of these words is invalid in all circumstances, but many companies do not provide evidence for these claims.
The most common source of stem cells in topical cosmetic products are plants. It has been shown that plants have long-lived stem cells in their meristem (a type of tissue found in plants). In some long-lived plants, such as trees, plant stem cells remain active over hundreds or even thousands of years, revealing their reliable function and self-renewing ability over the long term.
Pharmaceutical and cosmetic companies conduct research on the safety of plant-derived extracts in general and plant stem cell-derived extracts (i.e. cytokines, antioxidants, vitamins, growth factors etc) in topical cosmetic products. According to both Aggarwal et al. and Trehan et al., almost all cosmetic companies advertising that their topical products contain live stem cells actually contain stem cell extracts, which exemplifies yet another way in which marketers distort language. Topical cosmetics manufacturers that claim to have stem cell extracts in their products describe that these extracts nourish, protect or activate your endogenous skin stem cells, but these claims are unsubstantiated.
The second most common source of stem cells in topical cosmetic products are autologous – or donor–retrieved – adipose (fat) stem cell-derived extracts. Those used for face filler, face lifts, and cosmetic transplantations are typically sourced from autologous fat-derived stem cells, and an example of this has been published by Moseley et al. However, Eaves et al. has expressed a positional statement on these aesthetic procedures underlining that the safety and efficacy of these therapies remain unproven, that they are not based on solid scientific fact as they make consumers believe, and that they should only be conducted in the context of approved clinical trials with the collection and reporting of data.
According to Simona Neri and Palumbo et al. it is also important to note that procedures required to isolate and process fat stem cells to ensure the stem cells’ purity, quality, stability, beneficial effects, and safety are currently not completely standardized and optimized, with factors such as growth media and cryopreservation affecting the genetic stability of fat stem cells and safety of their transplantation. As per McArdie et al., we may want to be skeptical of the fat stem cell isolation/processing practices done by cosmetic companies, which either have not optimized the procedure for obtaining reproducible cell stability, purity and optimal transplant outcomes, or at the very least may not have published their protocols for the scientific community to evaluate.
PhytoCellTec, one of the most popular stem-cell based topical cosmetics on the market, produced by a company called Mibelle AG Biochemistry, retrieves plant stem cells from the Uttwiler Spätlauber apple tree. Two studies that were compiled by Mibelle AG Biochemistry on the effectiveness of PhytoCellTec can be read by the original authors here.
In a clinical trial of a group of 20 women aged from 37 to 64 years, a cream containing two per cent PhytoCellTec Malus domestica was applied to the crow’s feet of each participant, twice per day for four weeks. Wrinkle depth was measured using an optical device on the test start day, and after two and four weeks. Application of PhytoCellTec Malus domestica showed that the wrinkles reduced in depth by 8 per cent after two weeks and by 15 per cent after four weeks.
Although these initial results are promising, the clinical trial involved a small number of participants, without a placebo group, for a short period of time, and only one clinical study appears to have been conducted. Moreover, Mibelle’s webpage frequently refers to this study, which was conducted over a decade ago.
Despite their extensive cell culture processing system, as well as their promising results on the effectiveness of their plant stem cell extracts, the FDA documented in 2011 that this product is not recognized as effective for providing therapeutic value. However, in most cases, topical cosmetics are not classified as drugs and are not typically required to be FDA approved before they are marketed to consumers, as long as the products do not claim to provide therapeutic value or to alter structure/function of the human body. Rather, the FDA regulatory oversight of non-drug cosmetic products includes ensuring that the marketing of the cosmetic product is not adulterated (contains harmful substances), nor misbranded (contains improper labels/deceptive labels).
Unlike Mibelle AG Biochemistry, many companies marketing cosmetic products have no evidence to back-up their claims, and instead focus on how the product works in general terms. According to an analysis by Rachul et al., some websites do not even mention where the stem cells are sourced. In addition, many webpages either disclose that there is a lack of US FDA approval for their product, or do not mention the regulatory status. Some sites highlight that their product may have limitations or side effects, but do not indicate what these are.
The scientific research investigating whether plant/human fat-derived stem cells and their extracts directly or indirectly influence repair pathways for human tissues is fascinating, and its clinical use is promising, but it is still in its infancy. As always, buyer beware! Consider whether the topical cosmetic product is safe, whether the ingredients actually include live stem cell culture, whether it has shown to be effective in rejuvenating your endogenous stem cells, and whether or not it has regulatory approval before you decide to make a purchase.
Guest
Latest posts by Guest (see all)
- Regenerative immunotherapy: Hope for chronic autoimmune diseases - September 16, 2025
- Canada’s regenerative revolution: Why AI is the catalyst - September 4, 2025
- Summer by Design: A launchpad for future entrepreneurs and industry scientists - August 14, 2025
Comments