Shape your shapewear proposition

We cannot vouch for the accuracy of Shakira’s “butts don’t lie” statement. But the Federal Trade Commission says anti-cellulite and weight-loss claims embedded in caffeinated underwear sold by underwear company Wacoal and catalog retailer Norm Thompson were deceptive. As for Norm Thompson’s assertion that Dr. Oz endorses his products, the complaint challenges that assertion as false. (No, we’re not kidding about the caffeine-embedded bra parts.)

Wacoal promotes its iPant series in magazines, online, on social media and at point-of-sale displays. Is it just a temporary illusion of smoothness when women wear leggings, bike shorts or leggings under their clothes? Wacoal says: “Novarel Slim Microfiber contains microcapsules containing caffeine, retinol, ceramides and other active ingredients to improve skin appearance and control cellulite. Caffeine activates microcirculation and accelerates lipolysis .The active ingredients are released during garment use, providing permanent anti-cellulite effects.”

Wacoal’s tag recommends wearing leggings or shorts for eight hours a day for 28 days, and claims that “test results show that most women report,” among other things, “a reduction in thigh size.”

But Wacoal’s “evidence” is not as simple as it seems. The FTC said Wacoal’s claims were based on two unblinded, uncontrolled trials and had serious methodological flaws. What’s more, the company exaggerated the reality of the results people would get from wearing shapewear. Wacoal’s ads promise to “reduce thigh size,” but studies show the average reduction is less than 1/6 inch.

Norm Thompson also makes cellulite reduction and cellulite claims for the products it sells (bicycle shorts, leggings, and leggings sold under the Lytess brand): “Reduced 2 inches from hips in less than a month, Thigh reduced by 1 inch…”. . No effort required. ” The ad continues: “No dieting or pills. Just lose inches in these Lytess cellulite-busting leggings. The unique fabric is infused with caffeine to metabolize fat.  … In less than a month, You’ll be visibly slimmer and firmer.” The company claims the product works because “caffeine metabolizes and dehydrates fat cells” and “phyto-derived ingredients flush out toxins.”

Don’t just take our word for it, Norm Thompson says: “Dr. Oz loves these.” Company’s body beauty and solution Added to Table of Contents “Anti-Cellulite Recommended by Dr. Oz!”

What does science really show? According to the FTC, the studies cited by the company were unblinded, uncontrolled, and riddled with methodological flaws. Furthermore, Norm Thompson selectively promoted an isolated statistical outlier. Of the 55 participants in the study, only one reported a 2-inch loss in the hips, and only one reported a 1-inch loss in the thighs.

A warm recommendation from Dr. Oz? The FTC alleged that Dr. Oz never endorsed the product.

Under the terms of the separate proposed settlement, the companies will require strong and reliable scientific evidence to support a broad range of future advertising claims. In addition, Wacoal will pay $1.3 million and Norm Thompson will pay $230,000 to provide refunds to people who purchased the product.

What can other companies learn from these cases?

Substantiation of objective claims: Basic principles. When selling hard-to-mention items, most advertisers mention fit, comfort, or other subjective attributes. But the law separates suggestions that a certain type of underwear can help people look or feel better when wearing it with affirmative statements that it will reduce cellulite or shrink hips or thighs (especially claims that are purportedly supported by scientific evidence). A clear distinction. , and eliminate fat. If your claims do not have a solid basis, do not make objective claims that meet the Federal Trade Commission’s long-standing “reasonable basis” standard.

A brief description of the test method. In both cases, the FTC raised questions about how the underlying research was conducted. The appropriate approach will, of course, depend on (among other things) the nature of the claim and what experts in the field consider necessary to support the claim. But what about uncontrolled, non-blind testing of caffeine-infused dehydrated underwear? A prudent advertiser will carefully evaluate the approach.

When reviewing the results, take off the rose-colored glasses. Even setting aside fundamental methodological flaws, the FTC said Wacoal and Norm Thompson misreported their findings. As these cases illustrate, it’s unwise to build advertising campaigns around statistical outliers. Results based on best-case scenarios can lead to worst-case outcomes for advertisers.

Name changed? Advertisers like to associate their products with well-known brands is marketing 101. But FTC Section 101 states that if an advertisement says that someone endorses a product (whether an expert, celebrity, or other person), the statement must be true. Norm Thompson violates this principle by falsely claiming that “all styles are recommended by Dr. Oz for fighting cellulite!”

You may submit comments online regarding the proposed settlement with Wacoal and Norm Thompson until October 29, 2014.

Source link

from Tech Empire Solutions https://techempiresolutions.com/shape-your-shapewear-proposition/
via https://techempiresolutions.com/

from Tech Empire Solutions https://techempiresolutions.wordpress.com/2024/02/01/shape-your-shapewear-proposition/
via https://techempiresolutions.com/

from Paxton Willson https://paxtowillson.wordpress.com/2024/02/01/shape-your-shapewear-proposition/
via https://techempiresolutions.com/