Extracting Young People's Blood, Blood-Exchange Therapy? How Wild Is the Cosmetic Clinic Owner Exposed by Haier (海尔)?

Haier moves to cut ties after sensational claims

Haier Group (海尔集团) — through its Qingdao unit Haier Jinying Holdings (海尔集团（青岛）金盈控股有限公司, “Haier Jinkong”) — issued an urgent statement on March 30 denying any connection with Yu Meiren Group (虞美人集团) or its chairwoman Yu Wenhong (于文红). The clarification came after Yu reportedly told media and followers that her business counted Haier and investment firm Yingkang Yisheng among its backers and pushed a headline-grabbing “blood-exchange” anti‑ageing service. Haier Jinkong said those claims were false and that the purported “blood‑exchange” business had no link to the Haier group; the company also warned it would pursue legal remedies.

A long arc from beauty parlor to controversial empire

Yu Wenhong presents a classic rags‑to‑riches narrative: she started a small 11‑square‑metre beauty shop in Dalian in 1992 and built what she calls an international aesthetic and wellness group, with clinics in multiple Chinese cities and overseas tie‑ups. It has been reported that Yu and her firm have promoted extreme therapies — including harvesting plasma from 18–21‑year‑old men for expensive “functional protein” treatments and, reportedly, a so‑called “immortality needle” slated for a Dubai launch. Independent regulators and mainstream science tell a different story: U.S. regulators and peer‑reviewed studies have repeatedly warned that young‑blood transfusions show no proven anti‑ageing benefit and carry real infectious and coagulation risks.

An established pattern of regulatory and legal trouble

Yu’s business has long been shadowed by controversy. Chinese state media and local broadcasters previously questioned unlicensed procedures and opaque staffing; tax authorities later found hidden revenues of more than 47.55 billion RMB for entities linked to her, resulting in significant tax penalties. In 2023 her group was fined for illegal medical advertising. Family infighting and public accusations between Yu and her brother have further exposed alleged irregularities. It has been reported that Haier’s recent rebuttal triggered renewed calls for tighter oversight of medical claims and consumer protections in China’s booming but often loosely regulated cosmetic‑medicine sector.

Why this matters beyond tabloid shock

The episode is more than celebrity scandal. It raises questions about how fringe biomedical claims spread, the role of platform and investor due diligence, and the reputational spillover risk for established corporations in an era of rapid cross‑border health marketing. Regulators at home and abroad are already tightening scrutiny of dubious life‑extension and “biohacking” treatments. Who gets blamed when pseudoscience meets deep pockets and social media megaphones? For now, Haier has tried to draw the line — and the industry is watching.