Search Strategy · SEO · GEO · Paid · Texas + Tennessee
In regenerative medicine, compliance defines the search strategy — not budget.
The channels that work for a med-spa or a SaaS company are largely closed here. The winning move is to lead with education and scientific authority, own the AI-answer layer (GEO), and let that authority feed a targeted B2B outreach engine. That is exactly PranaGen's posture — the strategy and the compliance reality are the same thing.
Prepared by BioCreative Strategies · 2026-09-14 · for Ramon Coronado & the PranaGen / Made team
Grounded in live data, not theory
Every recommendation traces to a measured source, pulled 2026-09-11 to -14 — not opinion.
Policy audit
Google Ads Healthcare, Meta Health & Wellness, FDA regenerative-medicine alert, FTC substantiation — read verbatim, converted to per-term verdicts.
Keyword Planner
Real US search volume + cost-per-click via a BC-owned Google Ads account, geo-checked to TX/TN.
Live SERP (SerpApi)
28 geo-located Google queries — who ranks organically, who bids on ads, and which AI Overviews appear.
Multi-engine GEO run
20 prompts × 4 AI engines (Claude · GPT-4o · Perplexity · Gemini) = 80 answers, scored for brand + competitor citations. Re-run monthly.
Backing detail: internal docs 00–07 + evidence files. All figures dated; ranges where free-tool-sourced.
This is a compliance-first category
What the platforms' own policies + the FDA confirm — and what it means per search lane.
Google & Meta
Ban promotion of cell/gene therapies + "speculative/experimental" treatments. The only open lane is exclusively educational.
FDA
Zero FDA-approved exosome products. Stem-cell products unapproved outside cord-blood. Public warnings issued.
FTC + whole-domain
Health claims need rigorous evidence — everywhere, not just ads. Enforcers judge the entire website.
| Term category | SEO | GEO | Paid | Why |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Branded · Educational · Regulatory | yes | yes | yes | Google's stated educational exception; highest-value compliant lane |
| B2B supply / RUO / manufacturing | yes | yes | framed | Defensible if the landing page is B2B/RUO, no patient claims |
| Consumer therapeutic (general) | careful | careful | blocked | Speculative/experimental — paid off; organic only, no outcome claims |
| Indication-specific · Anti-aging therapeutic · Peptides | no | no | no | FDA-unapproved uses / Meta cure-ban / gated line — document only |
Paid search: a scalpel, not the engine
Google only lets you bid the B2B supplier lane here — and even that is tiny. But "tiny" isn't "worthless" for a high-value B2B product. Here's the real math.
| What people search | Volume /mo | Paid |
|---|---|---|
| "what is an exosome" (education) | ~500 | biddable · cheap |
| "exosome supplier" (B2B) | ~50* | biddable · $4–13 CPC |
| "regenerative biologics supplier" / "wholesale exosomes" | Unknown | too low to measure |
| "stem cell therapy near me" | 2,400 | blocked |
| "stem cells for knee pain" | 1,900 | blocked |
| "anti-aging stem cell treatment" | 480 | blocked |
*~50/mo nationally → single digits once narrowed to TX/TN. The high-volume demand is exactly what's paid-blocked ($15–$50 CPC).
Who is actually bidding — and on what (live, TX)
"exosome supplier for clinics" — 6 ads (Austin)
ExoCelBio · PurXcell · Quality-Aesthetics · Zeo ScientifiX — the clinic/aesthetic-supply set.
"stem cell supplier for clinics" — 6 ads (Dallas)
Charles River · AllCells · Applied StemCell · Zeo ScientifiX — the research/GMP-supply set.
Zero ads ran on any consumer "therapy / treatment / near me" term — Google suppresses that lane entirely.
Who owns the TX/TN supplier SERP
The organic results split into two competitor sets — and no single brand dominates the generic supply terms. That fragmentation is the opening.
Research / RUO suppliers
BioIVT · ReproCELL · Zen-Bio · Charles River · AllCells — credentialed, "research-use-only" framing. BioIVT owns "exosome supplier" organically.
Clinic-supply set
ExaVeyra Sciences (the benchmark) · LPG Wholesale · RegenOMedix · MedicaDepot — clinic/aesthetic wholesale.
Why PranaGen wins here
ExaVeyra sets the bar with live /exosomes/texas + /exosomes/tennessee pages and a deep science/regulatory hub. But its moat is content depth — and PranaGen already owns deeper science (the Made regenerative-medicine corpus + Type II Master Files + AABB sourcing).
The gap is purely publishing it as indexed, citable pages. The SERP is fragmented and winnable — this is out-depth, not out-spend.
Flag: Zeo ScientifiX (a Made partner) competes in this same lane on paid — ally-or-conflict to resolve.
GEO: winning the AI answer, not just the blue link
When someone asks ChatGPT, Google's AI, Perplexity or Gemini about exosomes, the AI's answer — not the ten blue links — is what they read. We measured an AI Overview on 26 of 28 searches PranaGen cares about. GEO is how you get named in that answer.
How we measure it
Each month we fan ~20 buyer questions across 4 engines (Claude · GPT-4o · Perplexity · Gemini) and capture Google's AI Overviews via SerpApi. For every answer we record: is PranaGen mentioned? is a PranaGen URL cited? which competitors are named? and the sentiment.
Two levels of "share of voice"
Brand SOV — how often PranaGen is named/cited across those answers. That's the number we grow.
Market citations — who the engines cite on the category today (FDA, PubMed, media, a few suppliers). It shows the authority pattern we have to displace.
The lane is wide open
Per-engine brand SOV
PranaGen surfaces only on its own-brand query today — 0% on every generic term.
Who the AIs cite instead (market)
On education/regulatory prompts, engines cite FDA, PubMed, media — no supplier owns them.
One corpus, two motions
All four channels run off the same PranaGen / Made science corpus and goals — the corpus feeds published pages, AI-answer prompts, and outreach messaging alike.
Active — Account-Based Marketing
B2B LinkedIn + email outbound to named TX/TN providers. Targeted, account-by-account demand capture — the engine that actually books conversations (the console + ARDD campaign already running).
- You choose the accounts; you reach them directly
- Messaging drawn from the same science corpus
- SEO/GEO make every touch land warmer
Passive — Inbound Authority
SEO + GEO. Earn trust at the exact moment a provider searches or asks an AI "is this legal / safe / who makes it." Compounding, low-risk, and — for GEO — currently unowned.
- They come to you, already researching
- Same corpus, published as citable pages
- Paid = a scalpel on the two B2B supplier terms only
Priority: SEO + GEO + ABM outbound are all primary; paid is a minor, compliant supplement.
One operating dashboard, inside the PranaGen app
Live SEO + GEO consoles, seeded from this research, behind login — with an educational field-guide layer so every metric explains itself.
Real volumes/CPC/difficulty · compliance verdict per term · ⓘ vocab on every column.
Live multi-LLM run + a monthly synthesis rendered right on the Overview tab.
Every keyword & prompt re-verified
Before go-live we mapped all 32 target terms + 20 GEO prompts back to the policy verdict table, and checked each channel.
The review caught and fixed one issue: two blocked longevity-therapeutic terms were still flagged for GEO tracking — now fully excluded, and the data seed was hardened so a re-run can't reintroduce them. A standing claim-review gate governs every public surface. Verdict: PASS
From dashboard to engine
What we need from PranaGen
Access to pranagenbio.com to publish · Search Console + GA4 grants (5 min each) · sign-off on the claim-review guardrails · content-priority confirmation.
The bottom line
PranaGen doesn't need to win a volume war it can't legally fight. It needs to be the most credible, most-cited, most-compliant voice in regenerative-medicine supply for TX/TN — and let that authority feed a targeted B2B engine.