The Amazing Meeting 2014

Like it? Share it!

Sign up for news and updates!






Enter word seen below
Visually impaired? Click here to have an audio challenge played.  You will then need to enter the code that is spelled out.
Change image

CAPTCHA image
Please leave this field empty

Login Form



Sex Magnets Retracted PDF Print E-mail
Swift
Written by Jeff Wagg   

As Harriett reported in this Swift article, sometimes an individual can make a difference. In this case, an Australian woman outraged by ridiculous claims for a pocket sex drive enhancer successfully campaigned to have the device removed. Now the company who promoted this worthless item displays the following banner at the top of its site:

 

retraction

So we once again congratulate Sandra Quincy for taking the time to file that complaint. At least in Australia, it seems someone is listening.

 

Trackback(0)
Comments (13)Add Comment
...
written by BillyJoe, February 18, 2009
If anyone can find "the full text of the panel's determination" they are better than me. I cannot find it anywhere on that site.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
and now for the bad news ...
written by MadScientist, February 19, 2009
Unfortunately these challenges must come on a case-by-case basis. At the moment some other magnet retailer is advertising magnetic mattresses and pillows for relief of aches and pains. The ad is pretty long and includes many testimonials. Yes! It worked for me! I sold 1000 of these suckers, walked into the bank and my headache went away.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +1
...
written by DrMatt, February 19, 2009
They'll be back. Unless they're bankrupted by fines, they'll be back. Along with the latest incarnation of the Quadro-pro Detector, the Q-Ray Bracelet, and Homeopathy.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
Teeny Tip of the Iceberg
written by Realitysage, February 19, 2009
One down and 278,964 to go......promising news just the same.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
Other Consumer Fraud....
written by GMJ, February 19, 2009
Has anybody tried to file a consumer type complaint against Sylvia Brown or John Edward for the sort of lies they tell about their powers? Between the magnet sellers being called on their bs and the "psychic" who got busted in San Jose there seems to be some grounds for going after these creepy charlatans for violating consumer protection laws.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +4
...
written by Skeptic Guy, February 19, 2009

Now if we could do anything about the Satiny Caftan on the same page. It's just wrong.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
D'oh!
written by DrMatt, February 19, 2009
Of course they can't market sex magnets. They don't have me!
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +1
...
written by nelson650, February 22, 2009
How do the employees at the sex magnet factory get any work done, what with all the hanky panky going on there?
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +1
...
written by Caller X, February 25, 2009
Sex Magnets Retracted.... remember when that happened to George Costanza? He was in the pool?
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +1
...
written by Steel Rat, February 26, 2009
The claims were unlawful? Or untrue? Or unlawful by virtue of being untrue? The retraction seems disingenuous with this weasel wording.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
Interview with Sandra Quincey about her win
written by Theo, February 26, 2009
Hi all. I interviewed Sandra Quincey about her win for my podcast. You can hear it here: http://www.skepticsfieldguide....al-20.html
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +1
...
written by Theo, February 27, 2009
Dr Matt. I think this would have hurt business for them a fair bit. Also, I think they had other magnetic "health" products as well, but now they're all gone.

Steel Rat. The complaint panel chose the wording. I'd say unlawful makes the most sense with regard to the panel's authority. That is, to make ruling on the Therapeutic Goods Act 1989 (Australia) and the Therapeutic Goods Advertising Code. I have a copy of the ruling by virtue of meeting Sandra!

It breached Sections 4(1)(b), 4(2)(a), 4(2)(c), and 4(2)(d) of the Code.

To paraphrase, (1)(b) requires correct, balanced statement with claims already verified; (2)(a) prohibits claims that are likely to arouse (no pun intended!) unwarranted and unrealistic expectations of effectiveness; (2)(c) prohibits representations that mislead; and (2)(d) prohibits ads that abuse a lack of knowledge of consumers.

All in all, a massive FAIL for Century Mail!
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
Regarding *(2)(d)
written by BillyJoe, February 27, 2009
prohibits ads that abuse a lack of knowledge of consumers.

This deserves a whole thread of its own.
(I am definitely in support, but I know that many object to this "big brother" role of government)

report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0

Write comment
This content has been locked. You can no longer post any comment.
You must be logged in to post a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.

busy