Ed Brayton is a journalist, commentator and speaker. He is the co-founder and president of 
I often find myself watching commercials on TV and just shaking my head that anyone could fall for such obvious nonsense in a marketing pitch. This is particularly true when it comes to the vast number of non-regulated medical products whose commercials are virtually ubiquitous on TV. Can any educated person watch the commercials for Extenze, the pill that claims to expand the size of "that certain part of the male anatomy" without laughing at such a transparent fraud?
Another one that has long irritated me is that commercial for footpads that remove "toxins" from your body through your feet while you sleep. It's an "ancient Japanese secret" you see. Here's one of the commercials:
Orac, the scourge of woo, has the goods on these pads and a new report from NPR that exposed the fraud.
In the story, the reporter, Sarah Varney, took used footpads to a laboratory to have them tested. Surprise, surprise! There was no significant difference between the used and unused pads. She then interviewed a doctor who explained just how ridiculous the concept of "detoxing" through the skin of your feet is. Of course, I said virtually the same thing nearly two years ago for a different brand of detox footpads and then again in April of this year specifically about the Kinoki Detox quack--I mean foot--pads.Finally, Varney then exposed unused Kinoki Detox Footpads to steam, and--surprise, surprise again!--the footpads turned black, no "toxins" from a wearer's feet needed.
Here's what I don't understand: why isn't the FTC going after frauds like this? They nailed the Enzyte folks, though for some bizarre reason the commercials are still on TV. There needs to be a full scale attack on medical frauds like this.
Medicine & Health
Comments
My theory is that this looks like the cleansing of ones feet which is a Christian rite so therefor he falls under the acceptable science guidelines adopted by the Bush administration.
/lame theory I know but its a lamer commercial
Posted by: yoshi | August 23, 2008 10:13 AM
I advise following what I call The Viagra Rule. If a product comes on the market that promises the world, just wait a bit. If it really does what it says it does, it will overwhelm the market in no time, just as Viagra did, and the conversation will quickly shift from whether it works to how we are going to deal with the effects of it working (like the heart attacks from newly sexually-active octogenarians).
If any controversy at all exists about such a product, or it stays on the late-night infomercial circuit, it's obviously crap. Successful products don't stay there for long, if they ever appeared there in the first place.
Posted by: Science Avenger | August 23, 2008 10:36 AM
I've always wondered why people find credence in the "traditional [insert Asian culture reference here] treatment" claim. I am guessing that the Japanese never used foot-extractive traditional treatments, and there is no historical or ethnological evidence of such.
When I am in health-food stores, I find all kinds of quackery next to my fair-trade coffee. Oxygen-enhanced water in PETE-plastic bottles, anti-herpes sprays whose active ingredient is sodium hypochlorite (bleach), etc.
While a half-century ago one may have been excused for finding the Orient to be the source of new and mysterious practices, modern communications and travel should have done away with that image.
When I find people talking about the enlightened Japanese, I usually interject that they are ascribing too much to a people who have a "Whale meat eating day" on the 9th of every month.
[Notice: I will make a duplicate post to the "Respectful Insolence" blog that is referenced by this thread]
Posted by: Daniel Kim | August 23, 2008 10:49 AM
Hmmm . . . Science Avenger's reference to the "late-night infomercial circuit" reminds me of my sleepless nights taking care of my baby daughter. I remember passing some of the time watching TV. Lots of infomercials, and many ads for "truck driver academy" (sounds like a slapstick comedy).
After a few nights, I dubbed it "The Losers' Channel"
Posted by: Daniel Kim | August 23, 2008 11:05 AM
Science Avenger said:
"If any controversy at all exists about such a product, or it stays on the late-night infomercial circuit, it's obviously crap. Successful products don't stay there for long, if they ever appeared there in the first place."
I think you have it exactly backwards. TV advertising is not free, and if a product's advertising remains on TV - late night or not - it is because they are selling product.
Enzyte remains on the tube despite a fraud conviction because they are making money by doing so. Lots and lots of money. (Evidently partly because when you give them your credit card number, they put you on a standing order that somehow resists efforts to cancel).
A lot of late night advertising is for business advice programs. Many of them simply show you how to make money by putting tiny ads in newspapers, magazines, comics for stuff like recipes. When 0.0001% of readers send you $3.00 for a recipe, which costs you the price of an envelope, sheet of paper, and stamp you can make money doing this sort of thing.
The entire mass mailing industry is built upon this high volume concept. And it all depends on the fact that there are a LOT of stupid or mentally feeble people out there with disposable income.
Posted by: Gingerbaker | August 23, 2008 11:44 AM
One might argue that we should allow snake oil to be sold.
We allow Megabucks gambling in this country, where the odds of a meaningful end result are millions to one against.
In contrast, Enzyte probably has demonstrated a response rate of twenty per cent or more, depending on how craven their "studies" are constructed. The placebo success rate generally runs that high.
Enzyte, it must be assumed, has by now amassed thousands of letters from very satisfied consumers, attesting to the benefits of the drug. BTW, Enzyte has an herbal formula which actually makes sense from pharmacological perspective.
Since homeopathy has well-credentialed proponents and enjoys official recognition from the UK Health Service as providing safe and efficacious therapy, and is really no more than colored water, who are we to criticize Enzyte?
Long live the Power of the Placebo! ;D
Posted by: Gingerbaker | August 23, 2008 12:12 PM
Breast enlargement pills, penis enlargement pills, baldness cures, products that make you car run on water: if they really worked, would anybody really have to advertise them?
Posted by: RM | August 23, 2008 12:50 PM
Quackery pays. The key is finding a way to do it which doesn't land you in Leavenworth, where you may find that not everyone needs Extenze to get a huge boner.
Posted by: soboco | August 23, 2008 12:56 PM
soboco with Post of the Month! :D
Posted by: Gingerbaker | August 23, 2008 1:02 PM
@DAniel Kim:
The reason is simple: institutionalized racism. This is different from racism as usually defined. A lot of people think it's about your personal feelings. It isn't, it's about power and the expression of such.
This means that stereotypical representations of various non-white ethnic groups and their countries continues, because the cultural shorthand we developed for them was invented by people who saw Asia as a mysterious, inscrutable place.
For example, the ostensibly kind-of-liberal premise of the comic book X-Men is tolerance. (And heck, I have to say that it's a damned good value to be promoting). But the book was still using silly stereotypical representations of people from various countries as late as the 1980s and 1990s. Why? It's cultural/visual shorthand for writers who didn't know anything about said countries people were supposed to be from. For example, whenever a foreign character exclaims something under stress, they mysteriously forget how to say "yes" in English, and always trot out some "traditional"
phrase. Or, my favorite example, a Vietnamese character who always exclaimed in French, which was a fluent language to about 10% of the population that had been educated in French schools.
Or the recently-introduced Afghani character who wears a veil and manages to spout patently ridiculous things about Islamic culture and the lack of difference the writers seem to acknowledge between Afghan and Arab culture and language. (Then there's the persistent myth that most Islamic women weir the veil, there seems to be a fetish for Western artists depicting women from Islamic countries with one despite the fact that only a small minority of the world's muslims live in the Gulf and wear it, see Indonesia for example).
What all this means is that Americans. whose culture is still at its base a European (or Eurocentric) one, will accept all kinds of silly statements about cultures that are from non-white countries.
Most Americans, remember, know Japan only through translated anime (and not much of that, despite its increasing influence) and the products they buy. Few Americans speak the language, and fewer still have ever been there.
Modern communications doesn't really matter, by the way, because all that cultural shorthand simply overwhelms the rational brain on a day-to-day basis. It's hard to erase the influence of a lifetime of socialization. Think of the way we decorate Japanese or Chinese restaurants for another example of cultural shorthand that may have zero to do with the ostensible food being served. (Like: putting meaningless chinese characters everywhere and decorating everything like the Qing dynasty).
@Gingerbaker
I don't know if you are being snarky/sarcastic. But the reason we no longer let people sell snake oil (or at least without certain restrictions) is because when you are selling anything that has a medical use you are putting someone's life in danger. Before the FDA existed one of the cures for colicky stomach pains in babies was a little orange powder. It worked. But it was also made of mercuric oxide. It worked because it killed all the nerves in the stomach. (It is still used by curanderas in poor Mexican villages, and there's been a big effort there to separate which traditional cures work and which are dangerous).
Lead was often used as a sweetener for wine, in fact, until the mid 19th century. It was also used as a seal on some containers. Lead has a sweet taste, which is why kids chew on the paint chips.
Most people selling this stuff don't bother to tell consumers anything, and as the buyer you have no way of knowing, unless you are a mind-reader.
Posted by: Jesse | August 23, 2008 1:03 PM
Ed just hasn't experienced the magic of drying your skin with ShamWOW!
You followin' me cameraguy?
Posted by: FishyFred | August 23, 2008 1:25 PM
And there is the guy who claims that many pounds of decayed meat are clogging our bowels and making us sick.
Posted by: Dr X | August 23, 2008 1:40 PM
But of course the pads turned black when exposed to steam - it's because of all the toxins in the water! Honestly, you should have watched the infomercial more carefully.
Posted by: Charlotte | August 23, 2008 2:47 PM
Jesse said:
"@Gingerbaker
I don't know if you are being snarky/sarcastic. But the reason we no longer let people sell snake oil (or at least without certain restrictions) is because when you are selling anything that has a medical use you are putting someone's life in danger. Before the FDA existed one of the cures for colicky stomach pains in babies was a little orange powder. It worked. But it was also made of mercuric oxide."
I'm just being sarcastic. I believe that fraudulent products should not be allowed to be marketed.
But I must say that I think your comments about the FDA are misplaced here. Neither Enzte or Extenze or the Japanese foot extract papers or homeopathic products are regulated by the FDA, as they are not medical products per se. It is the FTC who regulates consumer goods.
It is not the mission of the FDA to regulate food additives or vitamins, etc - products that do not make claims to treat medical conditions. And none of the above product/product types really make such claims, if they are careful. Homeopathy claims DO seem to overstep the bounds routinely, though, and it would be awesome if the FDA could put the homeopathy industry through its paces!
It would be nicer if the FDA DID regulate all these product types, but we would have to drastically increase their budget to do so. I don't think the tobacco industry would let that happen. The FDA would LOVE to regulate (ban) tobacco.
Posted by: Gingerbaker | August 23, 2008 3:01 PM
The thing that really irritates me is the "9/11" Liberian currency 20 dollar collector bill. The thing is a transparent scam and the company responsible has already had a judge accuse them of fraud in a previous scam.
The exchange rate means that if you happen to be in Liberia you might be able to get 32 cents for your bill.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eF3mzTpFCrU
Posted by: Hume's Ghost | August 23, 2008 3:33 PM
I liked the bit about trees "drawing energy in and toxins down [their] trunk[s]".
Anyone who's ever watered a plant should realize that plants tend to suck things in through their roots. Clearly, instead of footpads, this company should be selling silly hats.
Posted by: Matthew L. | August 23, 2008 3:56 PM
Gingerbaker--
Yeah, I know the FDA doesn't do "non-medical" products, tho this "Japanese" cure for toxins I think skirts the line, as they are making a claim that it cures headaches, or something. I also know that that is exactly how they get around it -- "We didn't claim it cures anything, just that it might provide some relief, blah blah."
The fact is though, that it illustrates why market systems are terrible for protecting people from stuff that could be very dangerous -- nobody has complete information to evaluate the claim, and the consequences could be disastrous. For instance, if I have allergies to nuts, it would really suck if someone said, "Oh by the way, Enzyte has nuts in it, we didn't tell you?" as I go into anaphylactic shock.
Posted by: Jesse | August 23, 2008 4:04 PM
Personally I don't understand why anyone buys the "ancient ___ remedy" line at all. Prior to the discovery of germ theory disease treatment was pure speculation, there is a reason life expectancy doubled during the 20th Century.
Gingerbaker, Jesse: Asymmetric Information (that's the fancified economists' term for what you're talking about) is definitely a market failure, and exactly the sort of thing where some form of government regulation is appropriate.
The FDA may not be the right way to go about it though. First off, it (or the politicians that control it) is vulnerable to political manipulation, which is why most woo is outside the FDA's control at the moment. Secondly bureaucracies tend to be overly risk averse. The FDA gets blamed if something dangerous gets through its process, but not if some safe and effective gets delayed for a bit, leading to additional deaths in the meanwhile. By some estimates the FDA kills more people than it saves.
That's not to say that a free-for-all is a good idea either. Perhaps there are ways of reforming the FDA to make it less obstructive without affecting safety too much. Alternatively some sort of compulsory product insurance may work, that effectively turns the insurance companies into competing regulators, but with financial incentives to be neither too permissive nor too strict.
Posted by: James K | August 23, 2008 4:49 PM
James--
The simplest measure is one used in many countries other than the US -- instead of having to prove drugs are not dangerous,. you have to prove they are safe.
The idea is that you catch problems before they happen, by making the affirmative statement "this will not harm anyone" -- it's the same precautionary principle doctors try to use to treat people, and why a good doctor keeps the drugs and surgery to a minimum necessary.
What we have now is a system where the FDA -- which has suffered real budget cuts for the last twenty years -- has to put out fires because all you have to do is prove that the drug won't do any damage in a certain set of trials.
The political manipulation comes from the fact that the budgets for the FDA (and NIH as well) have been cut to where they can't do independent studies. Industry does the studies and gives results, which are favorable, of course. There's no backstopping. And in fact it's better to wait a while for a drug than to set one loose that could hurt people.
Insurance is one idea, though I can see a few problems, mostly with calculating risk and figuring a way to make money.
This is getting OT, but one other issue is that drug companies demand subsidies and then turn around and say that the regulators are too tough and moan about the costs of developing the drugs, when the NIH provides half the money to do it. You want subsidies then I damned well want to have some input, even if indirectly. People forget that the difference between the private sector and the public one is that I have a lot more say in the latter as a citizen. And there are some things where the profit motive is exactly the wrong thing. I don't think businesspeople are evil, I just think that the incentives in the markets are often at odds with basic safety--or sometimes, basic decency and humanity. It isn't the businessman's fault, but that doesn't alter the fact of it.
Posted by: Jesse | August 23, 2008 5:03 PM
"Ancient Japanese secret, huh?"
If you've ever seen my feet, with the nail fungus and dry skin on the bottom, according to this commercial I should be dead a week from this Tuesday;-(
Posted by: Rev. AJB | August 23, 2008 6:02 PM
The FDA does regulate the sale of these products. The FTC regulates the advertising. The absolutely have the power to remove products that make health claims. I used to work int he industry in compliance, and it is my pet peeve to constantly hear people (including my professors in medical school) say that natural products are not regulated. The FDA chooses to have really lax enforcement.
Posted by: Hilary | August 23, 2008 8:35 PM
Hillary,
I've done FDA compliance, too, medical devices and bulk pharmaceuticals, and I believe you are forgetting the DHEA from '94. "Nutrients" and "supplements" are explicitly exempt from FDA oversight.
All the ads need is a barely readable disclaimer on screen for 5 -10 seconds and everything is fine.
Please note that the FDA did attempt to get ephedra/ma huang removed from the marketplace based on a number of fatalities, but the decision was overturned by a federal judge for lack of jurisdiction.
fusilier
James 2:24
Posted by: fusilier | August 23, 2008 8:49 PM
Sorry, for mis-spelling your name.
I really did use "preview," Honest.
:^
fusilier
James 2:24
Posted by: fusilier | August 23, 2008 8:51 PM
I do recall seeing a news report about a Japanese fringe sect that believed that the human soul resides at the bottom of the foot.
While I had long vaguely suspected that such a sect might exist somewhere, I had always thought (for obvious reasons) that it would be in an English-speaking country.
Posted by: Ambigram | August 23, 2008 10:18 PM
I always object to this simple "safe/not safe" dichotomy, and the whole "precautionary principle" in general. If you insist on "safe" as a standard, you will reject treatments that are risky, but whose benefits outweigh the risks. If you used "safe" as the behavioral standard for your own life, you would never take a shower, never cross the street, never drive to the doctor's office, etc. It's one of those cases where a lack of economic conceptualizatin (costs vs. benefits, as opposed to "no costs") leads us astray.
re: "just shaking my head that anyone could fall for such obvious nonsense in a marketing pitch. This is particularly true when it comes to the vast number of non-regulated medical products"
This is something I ran into in Eugene, Oregon, on a regular basis. Many people actually have more faith in the unregulated medical treatments than in the medical ones because they know that big pharma is just out to make money, and doesn't care what kind of poison they give you if it makes that money, and the FDA is in their pocket. That part was explicit. The implicit part is that the herbal companies, etc., aren't in it for the money, but really have your best interests at heart because they'r....well...they're into natural products, so they must be good earth-loving hippie earthchild types, right?
The abuse I've taken from gingerbaker and raging bee is nothing compared to the abuse I got when I said that if I wanted to get rich, the easiest way I could think of was to make fake natural remedies and pitch them to gullible people.
Posted by: James Hanley | August 23, 2008 10:47 PM
Jesse: We can't know for certain that anything is truly safe, as the possible risks of doing anything are essentially limitless. The best research suggests the FDA is too restrictive in its policies (though not in supplements as they can't act to restrict them). The best you can do is take reasonable steps to detect a threat and let a treatment through if it passes.
Posted by: James K | August 24, 2008 2:46 AM
Dr. Frank's Pet Pain spray www.petpainspray.com
Only 5 sprays in your pet's water bowl a day. And it's homeopatheic, so you know it's safe!
*rolls eyes*
While we're talking about late night infomercials and such, has anyone actually tried a ShamWOW?
Posted by: Foster Disbelief | August 24, 2008 5:41 AM
I think part of the problem is the "Dr. Feelgood" mentality that has been ingrained into so many Americans. We've been brought up to believe that we need to take such-and-such a pill or use such-and-such a product to feel normal, when preventative medicine works just as well (and in some cases much better). This is my main concern with advertising medical products on television.
People buy into things like these foot pads because they always accept the fact that not only are they never good enough by themselves, but that there is always a quick fix to the "problem."
Posted by: Ingersoll's Revenge | August 24, 2008 10:07 AM
Jesse said:
"The political manipulation comes from the fact that the budgets for the FDA (and NIH as well) have been cut to where they can't do independent studies. Industry does the studies and gives results, which are favorable, of course."
AFAIK, the FDA has never done independent studies as far as new drug review. They have never been in the new drug development business.
And of course the results the drug companies submit are basically positive - the FDA only accepts drugs for review that have demonstrated safety and efficacy! That said, all results, warts and all, must be and are presented. To imply that there is something wrong about this is is off the mark.
"This is getting OT, but one other issue is that drug companies demand subsidies and then turn around and say that the regulators are too tough and moan about the costs of developing the drugs, when the NIH provides half the money to do it"
What subsidies are those? Haven't heard about such a thing. Also, the NIH does not provide any money to the pharma companies. 95% of all prescription drugs are developed by, and paid for by, the prescription drug industry, not the NIH or other government science agencies.
The NIH, etc do basic research, the pharma companies do applied research.
BTW, sometimes the pharma companies have good reason to complain about their regulators being too tough. Each drug gets reviewed by different people, many of them not FDA staff, as they recruit panels of MD's and PhD's from outside. Sometimes these panels are led by zealots. It happens. I can tell you a couple of horror stories.
Posted by: Gingerbaker | August 24, 2008 10:48 AM
FWIW, the following website is keeping track of the harm that often results from evidence-free medicine:
What's the Harm?
Posted by: Ex-drone | August 24, 2008 11:58 AM
I've been delighted with the results I've obtained from using "Extenze" (and so has my wife :). I've found the resulting male enhancement to be nothing short of phenomenal.
Posted by: James Longwood | August 24, 2008 6:26 PM
Regulating and banning all of these products guarantees two things: one, we will breed a nation of "homo stupidicus," and two, we will end up with far more dangerous products produced by organized crime.
Homo Stupidicus:
Protecting people from themselves only ensures that idiots will multiply like mice and become the majority in a couple of generations. We're already well on the way to that. Some of you have tried to talk sense into wooies and gotten nowhere. Some of you have tried to talk sense into YECies (young-earth creationists) and gotten nowhere. There are entire subcultures in the US with average IQs of about 80, and some of 'em vote. Try talking to some of those people some day and see how far you can get.
The answer to all of the above is natural selection. Stop protecting people from themselves. Let them darwinize themselves and take themselves out of the gene pool. The world is already suffering mightily from overpopulation and overconsumption, so someone has to go. May as well let 'em do it voluntarily. And yeah I'm as serious as the proverbial tax collector about this.
Organized crime:
Look at the illegal drug trade. Now to that add herbal remedies, tobacco, and, since alcohol is toxic, addictive, and involved in half of all murders, suicides, and vehicle fatalities, let's bring back prohibition too. (You do realize, don't you, that every arguement made against tobacco applies as well to alcohol...) And then let's watch Al Capone and his latter-day variants become the great folk culture heroes, catering to everyone's every whim. And then let's watch our political process become even more corrupted than it is now. Check out life in places such as Colombia, and unfortunately those factors are spreading into Mexico as well. Check it out. That's the real drug war, being fought with military-style weapons, and the bad guys are winning.
A modest proposal:
Require ingredients listings on everything people put into their bodies, in a readable type face. Require them to be scrolled in a readable type face across the bottom of TV ads. Require FDA disclosure statements such as "this product appears to do exactly nothing," and "this product is dangerous, addictive, and deadly" (alcohol too!), and so on, to be included in advertising.
As for those late-night radio and TV ads, this one is equally simple. Require that the buyer have a full disclosure statement before the actual purchase is made. For orders by phone, the disclosure may be provided as a spoken announcement or recording, in a normal speed of speaking. Otherwise, the buyer calls up and gives their address, and gets the full disclosure statement by postal mail or email, after which they can place their order. And of course, those disclosure statements need to be online on web sites. And prosecute any circumvention of the disclosure laws.
The disclosure statements need to be verbal, not graphical, and they need to be written in language that is understandable to a normal highschool graduate.
And then if people want to buy stuff that either does nothing or harms them, FINE. LET THEM! Encourage them as a patriotic duty to keep the economy growing!
Really, you do not have to fret about protecting idiots with IQs of 80 and/or superstitions from the dark ages, from their own imbecility. Let nature do the work for you. Enough of this death-denialist BS that seeks to give everyone nine decades on this planet. Everyone is going to die sooner or later, so it's better that the stupid ones go sooner.
And it's better that the rest of us inhabit a world where the worst we encounter are hucksters and snake-oil pushers, rather than a moron majority, and pervasive organized crime and the pandemic violence it breeds.
Posted by: Thomas Malthus | August 25, 2008 10:42 AM
Then there is always the fact that, from a strict science point of view, every time an add is run where someone spouts off that something is "clinically proven," they're technically lying to you (i.e., there is no proof in science).
Posted by: Josh | August 25, 2008 11:38 AM
Jesse -
While many companies skirt close to the line, if they don't outright cross it, as long as they are not claiming their product is a medicine and as long as they disclose on their packaging that their product has not been approved by the FDA as a treatment for the condition they claim it cures/treats, they aren't breaking the law. It would be nice if this was tightened up a bit, but when they are required to disclose on their packaging and in their marketing that it hasn't been shown to be effective and they comply, there isn't much more one can do.
This is very similar to companies that packaged herbs (including the wormwood) that are used to make Absinthe (back when it was illicit in the U.S.) and sold them as "historical novelties." Never mind that if you sent for their catalog (if that's not how you got the product in the first place) you would have instructions for brewing the herbs in vodka to produce something very like the illicit Absinthe. They warned you on the package and in the catalog that using this product is dangerous and illegal, so they were covered.
Posted by: DuWayne | August 25, 2008 2:29 PM
What I love about the Extenze commercial is that they actually interview people on the street who have used the product! Can you imagine walking up to complete strangers and asking them if they use a penis-enhancement product, and the guy says "yes"! It's so believable...
Posted by: Mike Austin | August 25, 2008 5:19 PM
Unfortunately, quackery is pretty pervasive in "legitimate" products as well. Most over-the-counter cold medications are literally worthless, to take just one example.
Posted by: Mike Austin | August 25, 2008 5:25 PM