In light of the ongoing controversies surrounding poly-laminin, a protein developed to stimulate the regeneration of spinal cord injuries, Brazilian scientific societies are raising concerns about the potential confusion between experimental research and established clinical applications. In a joint editorial, the presidents of the Brazilian Society for the Progress of Science (SBPC) and the Brazilian Academy of Sciences (ABC) stress the importance of addressing questions regarding the evidence for this substance in appropriate technical forums that involve peer review and transparency. This approach is aimed at avoiding premature judicial actions and media exposure that could misrepresent the scope of the research.

In recent months, poly-laminin has gained attention in the media and on social networks, leading to isolated reports being treated as evidence of its efficacy. Although the substance is currently undergoing safety testing by the National Health Surveillance Agency (Anvisa), the increased public interest has sparked a situation where individuals are turning to the courts to demand access to the protein based on its reported benefits, despite the lack of solid clinical evidence supporting its effectiveness.

The calls for a careful scientific approach highlight the need for responsible communication and the risk of conflating emerging scientific research with definitive clinical results. The editorial underscores the necessity for clarity and accuracy in public discussions about poly-laminin, as well as the importance of relying on institutional pathways for scientific debate rather than succumbing to sensationalism in media representations or hasty legal actions, which could ultimately impede genuine scientific progress.