Digital propagation of regenerative myths skews induced blastema therapy literacy, ethical appraisal, and participation intent
July 6
Short-form video feeds have become a primary source of information about limb regeneration technologies among university trainees, yet unverified claims regarding induced blastema–based interventions circulate widely. Here we experimentally quantify the impact of such misinformation on foundational knowledge of regeneration biology, bioethical judgment, and willingness to enrol in first-in-human protocols.
In a preliminary phase, we curated stimulus clips through systematic content analysis, generating representative exemplars of accurate and inaccurate messaging about cellular reprogramming strategies that reactivate appendage patterning programs. Feasibility metrics confirmed ecological validity of the clip set.
In the main experiment a large cohort of regeneration-naïve students was randomised to view either (i) scientifically vetted information, (ii) misinformation suggesting immediate, scar-free limb restoration via simple topical factors, or (iii) neutral control footage unrelated to regenerative medicine. Pre-exposure surveys established baseline proficiency in developmental signalling cascades that govern blastema formation.
Post-exposure assessment revealed that participants shown inaccurate clips demonstrated significantly poorer factual recall of key pathways (e.g. FGF-Wnt feedback, bioelectric gradients), yet paradoxically expressed greater confidence in their understanding. Conversely, viewers of accurate material displayed enhanced knowledge and heightened confidence. Notably, the misinformation group reported stronger intentions to pursue both regulated stem-cell trials and unlicensed “rapid regrow” clinics abroad. Condition assignment did not significantly alter ratings of ethical concern surrounding off-label induction of embryonic gene programs.
Perceived entertainment value of the videos positively correlated with both knowledge self-efficacy and eagerness to seek intervention, independent of content accuracy.
These findings provide early mechanistic insight into how digital misinformation can erode biological literacy while simultaneously amplifying enthusiasm for speculative regenerative procedures, underscoring an urgent need for targeted science communication within emerging limb-restoration communities.