Power Balance ordered to remove misleading statements

By Phil Plait | December 24, 2010 12:11 pm

I have great news of another big skeptic victory: Power Balance, a company that makes magic rubber wristbands, has been cited with making misleading claims about the bands.

<Nelson Muntz>HA HA!</Nelson Muntz>

Like many of the skeptic victories this year, this one comes from Australia, specifically the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC), a government watchdog group that has legal authority over businesses. And they’ve exercised that authority: according to the Australian Skeptics (linked above), the ACCC has ordered Power Balance to

• remove misleading claims from their website and packaging

• publish advertising informing consumers that they made claims that could not be substantiated

• offer refunds to all consumers who feel they may have been misled and

• remove the words “performance technology” from the band itself.

Sweet.

I’ve written about similar bands before; basically, these are silicone wristbands, sometimes marketed with a hologram inserted into them which are "tuned to your body’s frequency", that manufacturers claim will help you in all sorts of manners including athletic performance, balance, stamina, and so on. Now, far be it from me to say that a product cannot possibly do what the manufacturers claims lest we need to erase everything we have learned about science, physics, and the Universe itself for the past three centuries, but I suspect these bracelets’ abilities to do anything beyond the placebo effect may be slightly exaggerated. And I’m glad the ACCC agrees.


I can’t help but think that a lot of this is due to the efforts of my friend Richard Saunders, an Aussie skeptic who is apparently everywhere Down Under where nonsense is promulgated. He has written about these wristbands, appeared on TV to give demos on how easy it is to fool people into believing something they hold in their hands can affect their balance and strength — the demo is straight charlatanism and trickery — and simply told everyone about these bands. You can read more about how he’s done this at Sceptic’s Book, which also has videos of Richard talking to wristband salesmen and giving the demo.

The media have taken notice of this, too, with articles published in the Sydney Morning Herald, the Cliffview Pilot, and The Age. That makes me happy, as we skeptics can talk about this a lot and still only reach a fraction of the people who really need to hear it.

Of course, it helps that the ACCC forced Power Balance to publish this lovely humiliating advertisement:

"No credible scientific evidence." Heh.

Now, I am no fool; I know that people will still buy these products, and I know the company has made millions selling them. But those of us in the reality-based community can still take a bite out of them. If you bought one of these bands (or know someone who did) please take a look at the retraction, and if you are unsatisfied in any way with the product, demand a refund. The instructions for how to do so are on the Power Balance site itself.

Congrats to all the skeptics in Australia for showing that it doesn’t matter how big a company is or how much cash they make; if they make misleading or false claims, they’ll have to pay for them.


Related posts:

When a University helps promote nonsense
Deluding Australia
Australian skeptics cheer David and Toni McCaffery


Comments (60)

Links to this Post

  1. BaslerCast - Power Balance gets slapped in Australia | January 8, 2011
  1. Mike Saunders

    That’s good news. Though you’re right that many people will still believe, for many years to come.

    I once engaged in conversation with this girl about these power pyramids. To make a story short, they are made out of fiberglass mold and are suppose to reduce negative energy. I think you’re suppose to bury them in your lawn or something.
    Anyway, the guy that ‘invented’ this crap was put in jail by the FDA OVER 50 YEARS AGO. It will always be brought back from the dead by people looking to make a buck.

    Oh yeah, its called Orgonite. I just looked and an organization by me, Detroit Domes, is giving them away for donations to them.

  2. Old Rockin' Dave

    I look at Australia, then I look at the situation here in the US, and I think, “If only…”. If we only had a consumer watchdog with that kind of teeth. If we only could make all the purveyors of woo-based crap put up or shut up for real. But the Right won’t allow it – it violates some imaginary right to make false claims about cheap garbage and make obscene profits that get recycled into campaign donations.

  3. Big Fat Earl

    Actually, Dave, for this sort of New Age alt-medicine woo, it’s usually the far-left loons who fall for it. The far-right loons are too busy being suckered into faith healing, which amounts to the same thing with different trappings. Both ends of the political spectrum have their share of mystical mumbo-jumbo, and one’s politics don’t really have anything to do with gullibility or anti-science (aside from what flavor of psuedoscience you fall for).

  4. Dave

    saw the bogus schpeil at the mall yesterday and walked by saying baloney!

  5. Floyd

    The people into faith healing or New Age are simply being suckered into religious woo, but official religions get a pass because they have the trappings of an official religion. See Scientology, Christianity, Buddhism, and so forth…

  6. Can we get the con-men at Energy Armor to do the same? If you know Travis and Dale Roy, they had a very interesting run in with these yahoos.

  7. bigjohn756

    I want one of these to wear so that I may demonstrate its effectiveness. If someone intends to discard their bracelet then please just send it to me so I can test it. Thank you. Merry Christmas!

  8. They don’t make it easy to get a refund eh? The return of the product should be good enough.

  9. I was in the only local jewelry store the other day getting a present for my wife when I saw they had brochures for that damned Qray fraud. I called the owner over and gave her hell for selling woo. Still there as I write but made me feel better :)

  10. Mike – Orgonite – obviously a scammer trying to invoke the wraith of Wilhelm Reich :)

  11. Scott

    Earl: you are basically correct in that the far left, politically, are more prone to fall for woo. However, Dave’s statement (that the Right is why we probably won’t have such a powerful watchdog for this sort of thing) is also basically true. There’s a knee-jerk reaction there against anything that regulates corporate behavior.

    Anyway, good to see junk being officially labeled junk, and with an awesome forced apology for good measure.

  12. Joseph G

    @#5 Floyd: To be fair, many people who practice Buddhism will tell you that it’s not a religion at all, and I agree. There is nothing within the basic principles (the 4 noble truths, the eightfold path) specifying a God or any supernatural beings, nor are you commanded to worship anyone or anything. Of course, in many Buddhist sects you’ll find extensive veneration of certain people, and references to ghosts, souls, and other such things, but these are typically pre-Buddhist cultural trappings. In the same way that Christianity and Islam wind up appropriating cultural traditions that pre-date them, Buddhism has done the same, in many cases. Tibetan Buddhism comes to mind – much like the Catholic church, they’ve built a very ornate, highly structured system around something that was originally pretty darned simple. The comparison still isn’t exact, of course – even early Christianity was a religion. Still, if you get far enough back to basics, you can still find people who consider Jesus to be a great philosopher and nothing more.
    Full disclosure: I do consider myself to be a practitioner of Buddhism – however, I don’t consider myself religious or theist at all. I see it more like being a fan of Bertrand Russel or GWF Hegel :)

  13. Joseph G

    @#3: Too true. At least you can (sometimes) wrangle up some faith-healing for free. The New Age stuff seems to be able to slurp up a lot more disposable income.

    @#11: Interesting point – that right-wing activists, concerned about some ideal vision of free enterprise and the promotion of Christianity, would help lay the groundwork for (typically left-wing) hippies to get suckered into buying aura-cleansing rocks and homeopathic water at outrageous prices.

  14. 24601

    @8 SeanJa: I agree, they added one sure way to weasel out of having to pay refunds: just claim that wherever you bought the thing wasn’t “an authorized reseller.” Also, how many people still have the credit records, store barcodes and receipts? Do customers need all 3, or is just one of the three good enough?

  15. Max Fagin

    I’m sorry, but I can’t get behind this. Stupid people buying stupid things is one of the many things we must put up with if we want to live in a free society (That’s true both here and in Australia).

    Advertising is deceptive by it’s very nature. And giving a government entity the power to regulate what private firms are and are not allowed to say about their product seems like a dangerous move. Power Balance’s complete lack of evidence in defense of their products “abilities” means that they shouldn’t be allowed to claim certification from the FDA, or whatever the Australian equivalent is. But for the government to say that Power Balance shouldn’t be allowed to lie about their own product in their own advertising space seem like a gross violation of free speech to me.

    Lies and unsubstantiated claims are always going to be a part of advertising. And no government should have the power to force a firm to discredit itself, simply because the firm said something that the government deems to be TOO MUCH of a lie.

  16. Fozzillo

    DON’T FORGET ITALY!
    Power balance has been fined in Italy for 350 thousand EURO the very same day!
    After the national health Institute verified confirmed the absence if effect, the antitrust authority decided the penalty due to the lack of scientific evidence about what reported in the advertisings.

    Link to the news article
    http://tinyurl.com/3agn8sv (google translated)

  17. JB of Brisbane

    @Floyd #5 – I didn’t think there was anything official at all about Scientology.
    As for the Power Bands decision – bravo. Should happen more often.

  18. But for the government to say that Power Balance shouldn’t be allowed to lie about their own product in their own advertising space seem like a gross violation of free speech to me.

    You say that like it’s a bad thing.

  19. Max Fagin

    “But for the government to say that Power Balance shouldn’t be allowed to lie about their own product in their own advertising space seem like a gross violation of free speech to me.”

    You say that like it’s a bad thing.

    Um . . . It is?

    I would say that a gross violation of free speech is a bad thing. But I’m confused: Are you agreeing with my previous post that this is a violation of free speech; but then asserting that it is okay?

  20. @Max Fagin

    So is yelling “Fire!” in a crowded theatre.

  21. HvP

    Max Fagin,

    There are recognized limits to free speech, even in an open society such as ours. Fraud is not considered to be protected by free speech in much the same way that libel and slander are not.

    The Federal Trade Commission’s Bureau of Consumer Protection is ostensibly concerned with this very topic.

  22. HvP

    And if I can elaborate.

    Yes, you can exorcise your free speech by making statements in public. But then when you exchange a product for payment based on the stated claims, then it becomes a CONTRACT.

    Making false statements in this context is a breech of the contract and constitutes fraud.

  23. Old Rockin' Dave

    @ Max Fagin: “But for the government to say that Power Balance shouldn’t be allowed to lie about their own product in their own advertising space seem like a gross violation of free speech to me.”
    So lies about a product are okay? Can you really mean this? How about “Made in a factory where peanut products are not permitted”? “Made in USA with all American raw materials”? “Kosher”? “Safe when used as directed”? “Safe for use with infants and children”? “Made with fire-retardant materials”? “Certified to protect occupants in 100 mph impacts”? “Full refund if not satisfied”?
    I guess to you those are all permissible claims even when they are outright lies?

  24. noen

    “I suspect these bracelets’ abilities to do anything beyond the placebo effect may be slightly exaggerated. “

    But the placebo effect can be quite significant. Sugar pills can be more effective than so-called powerful medicine, and that’s even when people are told they are getting a sugar pill. Prozac for instance is less effective than placebo, which when you think about it is an accomplishment itself.

    There is nothing wrong with belief. Your belief that you will get well or that the man in the lab coat can make you better, can all by itself help you to bet better.

  25. alfaniner

    @#24 noen
    Prozac for instance is less effective than placebo, which when you think about it is an accomplishment itself.

    You are incorrect on this.

  26. Univeral

    wooot

    just in time for xmas

    reminds me of the saying if good people do nothing.

    I see this stuff all the time junk science pedalled to sell products.
    only a few days ago when shopping with my gf in the local department store i came across beauty cosmetic person selling my gf a cream that cost a ridicules amount, when i asked why it costed so much she replied because it contained peptides.

    so i asked what these peptides do she had no idea only that were good.
    i ardently went into skeptic mode
    ah so anything that has peptides is good for your skin ?
    exactly she replied
    right, so poop contains peptides should my gf rub that on her face

  27. pheldespat

    Schadenfreude, sweet Schadenfreude just in time for Grav-Mass / Saturnalia.

  28. LeslieS

    My cousin works for this company out in California and has met all sorts of famous actors and athletes while promoting it. And she buys into their “power” hook, line, and sinker. I’m so glad we’re not spending Christmas together or it would have gotten ugly.

  29. Lorne

    Unfortunately this only effects the Aussie web site. The .com site still looks like business as usual. I suspect it won’t change there for a long time.

  30. Ben L

    Now we just need the US equivalent to publish something about those dowsing rods ->bomb detectors that are in Iraq and elsewhere.

  31. MadScientist

    I predict that despite this, many people (especially sports people) with their magic rubberbands will still believe and add yet another conspiracy theory to their list.

  32. Naomi

    Max Fagin @ 15, Australia doesn’t actually HAVE Freedom of Speech. (We don’t have a bill of rights, either…) http://www.aph.gov.au/LIBRARY/pubs/rn/2001-02/02rn42.htm The government is actually well within its rights to restrict what can and can’t be advertised – good in this case, although obviously that’s not ideal.

  33. noen

    “Prozac for instance is less effective than placebo, which when you think about it is an accomplishment itself.”

    You are incorrect on this.

    No, actually, I’m not.

    “Drug-placebo differences in antidepressant efficacy increase as a function of baseline severity, but are relatively small even for severely depressed patients. The relationship between initial severity and antidepressant efficacy is attributable to decreased responsiveness to placebo among very severely depressed patients, rather than to increased responsiveness to medication.”

    Initial Severity and Antidepressant Benefits: A Meta-Analysis of Data Submitted to the Food and Drug Administration Kirsch I, Deacon BJ, Huedo-Medina TB, Scoboria A, Moore TJ, et al. PLoS Medicine Vol. 5, No. 2, e45 doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0050045

  34. Max Fagin

    So lies about a product are okay?

    I don’t think it’s ethical to lie about a product, but should dishonesty be punished with a legal reprimand? Of course not. If it were, you would have to punish virtually every firm that has ever existed.

    “Made in a factory where peanut products are not permitted”? “Made in USA with all American raw materials”? “Kosher”? “Safe when used as directed”? “Safe for use with infants and children”? “Made with fire-retardant materials”? “Certified to protect occupants in 100 mph impacts”? “Full refund if not satisfied?”

    If you choose to make any of the above lies about your product then you won't be able to claim any stamp of approval or certification from whatever government agency you happen to fall under the jurisdiction of (FDA, EPA, USDA etc.) For example, you won't be allowed to say "FDA approved to treat ulcers". But if people still want to buy your product, even with the full knowledge that you haven't passed muster with a government certification process, then I can't see any objection to that. People's buying habits are their personal business, not the governments.

    Should Coke be required to post a public statement to the nature of "Note: There is no scientific evidence that the act of opening this product will bring you happiness"? Of course not.

    Should Energizer Batteries be required to carry the disclaimer "Note: Energizer has not conducted research to conclusively prove that our product is, in fact, trusted everywhere"? Of course not.

    Should Six flags be required to write under their slogan "Note: There is no evidence that Six Flags parks do in fact contain more flags or more fun than our competitors"? Of course not.

    The essence of advertising is creatively distorting the truth about your product (i.e. Lying). Power Balance's claims aren't any more deceptive than any other firm's advertising practices. Do I wish firms would never lie about their products when attempting to sell them? Of course I do. Do I think such practices should be illegal? Of course not. Caveat emptor.

  35. XPT

    “should dishonesty be punished with a legal reprimand”

    Of course it should. Especially if a firm makes false MEDICAL claims.

  36. noen

    “should dishonesty be punished with a legal reprimand”

    I think the test is did the product cause harm. I also believe that lying is not illegal but fraud is. There is a difference legally. The power band thingie is relatively harmless and if people believe it helps them then it does so it isn’t really even fraud. “Athletic performance, balance, stamina, and so on” are matters of psychological belief so if you believe in it, it works. This is why top performing athletes are so superstitious. At their performance level any edge you can get makes a difference. Visualization also works. If you visualize some goal that you wish to achieve the act of imagining it will help you to reach that goal that you might not have otherwise.

    That is why faith is so valuable. Faith is the ability to act even though all evidence says you should not. People who act on faith, that is, people who believe in themselves, will in the long run be more successful than those who never act unless they are sure they will succeed.

  37. “The essence of advertising is creatively distorting the truth about your product (i.e. Lying).”

    Are you from marketing?

  38. Franklin

    You heard it hear folks. Fraud shouldn’t be a crime. Max Fagin must be a devotee of Austrian economics.

  39. Frying dutchmen

    But noen, power bands don’t work period…

  40. noen

    If you believe in them, they work. Actually, even if you don’t, they’ll still work. People who are given a placebo and told that’s what it is still benefit from it.

    There are 30 million users and 3 billion dollar industry around Prozac, which is no better than placebo. Is that fraud?

  41. Mike

    Here’s a story from ESPN’s Outside the Lines. I don’t generally expect a skeptical story from them, but the did a good job on this one.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H9C8al3rWDQ

  42. Max Fagin

    Fraud shouldn’t be a crime.

    No, I said lying in advertising shouldn’t be a crime. Or rather, if it were a crime, you would have to punish virtually every firm that ever advertised for itself.

    As I said, the essence of advertising is creatively deceiving the consumer (i.e. lying). That is neither good nor bad, it is just the way things are. And I can’t see any justification for penalizing Power Balance without also penalizing all the firms I listed in my previous comment.

    Power Balance bracelets don’t actually improve you athletic performance? News flash: Opening a Coke will not allow you to open happiness, there exist locations where Energizer batteries are actually not trusted, and whether or not Six Flags amusement parks contain more flags and more fun is a matter of scientific debate.

    Advertisements are almost never true from an empirical, scientific perspective; Power Balance is no exception. And punishing Power Balance for doing what every other firm on this planet does seems to be making an unjustified exception.

  43. Zucchi

    Max – – are you under the impression that disallowing false factual claims in advertising is a new idea? We can argue whether it’s a good idea or not (it is), but I hope you know that it’s been standard law for several decades now.

    Power Balance made specific claims about factual matters, meant to be taken literally. They didn’t say, “Power Bands make life more fun!” which would have been meaningless and therefore protected. They said, “Power Bands will improve your balance, strength, and flexibility”. You see the difference between that and a Coke ad? Your argument relies on a false equivalency.

  44. Frying Dutchmen

    Neon that is rubbish. Placebo is that you think it works when it doesn’t do anything. It is shown that these power balance bands don’t work, what else do you want me to say? It’s all done via trickery.

  45. Mike G

    Noen, you’re still wrong. See:

    Johnson, B.T. & Kirsch, I. (2008). “Do antidepressants work? Statistical significance versus clinical benefits”. Significance 5 (2): 54–58.

    It’s essentially a direct response to the misinterpretation of the authors’ paper that you cited. From the abstract: “Our authors’ reanalysis of drug trials was widely reported as implying that antidepressant drugs such as Prozac are overprescribed and useless. The truth, as Blair T. Johnson and Irving Kirsch explain, is more complex, and more interesting.”

    They found that “analyses showed that patients on drug improved significantly more than those on placebo.” The difference in improvement is greater for more depressed individuals. HOWEVER, while the differences are statistically significant, they’re not dramatic enough to be clinically significant, meaning that you wouldn’t be able to distinguish between patients given a placebo vs. antidepressants just by interviewing and observing them.

  46. Dan I.

    @ Max Fagin;

    Let’s move into a different realm. If I make a false claim about you (slander or libel) should you be able to sue me?

    Now you might argue that this is a civil not a criminal matter and the same rules do not apply. But you asked whether such false statements should be subject to a “legal” penalty. Plus, the First Amendment doesn’t cover only criminal issues.

    But if I make a false claim about you, actual damage to you may result, people may no longer do business with you, people may shun you, people may even engage in physical violence towards you if the falsity is inflammatory enough.

    Should you not have a right to demand I compensate you for damage to your reputation, livelihood, or person?

    Unrestricted free-speech such as you propose would leave you with no remedy.

  47. mike burkhart

    I think this is good news .However I don’t think it will stop it ,these bands will probally become a fashion statement after all Coke a Cola once made helth claims (it no longer dose) and people still drink .As a moderent I love the bashing of the left and right on this blog.keep it up The thing I love Austrlia for is Mad Max movies on my list for the best post-apocalopic films

  48. noen

    Frying Dutchmen said
    “Neon that is rubbish. Placebo is that you think it works when it doesn’t do anything. It is shown that these power balance bands don’t work, what else do you want me to say”

    Whether or the powerbands lived up to their claims was not my concern. I simply wished to point out that the placebo effect is very powerful, more powerful than many prescription drugs claim to be, and works even if you know its a placebo. The mind is powerful thing and can have very real effects on the body. There are of course limits.

    Mike G said
    “you wouldn’t be able to distinguish between patients given a placebo vs. antidepressants just by interviewing and observing them.”

    But it works better than placebo, even though you couldn’t distinguish placebo from prozac patients…… but it works better because the study was “misunderstood”……. sounds like BS to me. I wonder why that is? Why is my BS detector going off? I wonder, should I check wikipedia and see?

    Oh!! Looky looky:

    Fluxentine controversy
    “The authors concluded that “although the difference [between the placebo and antidepressants] easily attained statistical significance”, it did not meet the criterion for clinical significance, as used by National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (UK), “for any but the most severely depressed patients.”

    Statistically significant is not the same as clinically significant which means that I was right above, before I even checked wiki, to doubt its efficacy.

    In other words, prozac “works” slightly better than placebo for all but the most severely depressed patients. Didn’t i say that? Yeah, several times now.

    It seems to me that many people here and other so-called skeptics are only skeptical when it advances their atheistic positivism. But when the science contradicts their ideology they suddenly turn into believers of the received orthodoxy from those in authority.

    Guess what? All those touchy feely things that you hate so much? All that “believe in yourself” crap and the “visualize good things” and the positive thinking messages that come wrapped up in religious or quasi religious garb? That stuff actually works and has been shown to work in clinical trial after trial. People who have the faith that you despise live longer, healthier and happier lives than you ever will.

    deal.

  49. Keith Bowden

    Crap. I posted a comment a while ago and it still hasn’t shown up. Ah well.

  50. flip

    #48, noen,

    Not discussing Prozac since I know nothing about it… but there’s a reason why people are given anti-depressants. You can’t just tell someone who’s depressed to cheer up, be positive, and visualise good things. Particularly if they’re suicidal.

    To me, your attitude smacks slightly of victim blaming. “If only that person had been more positive in their views, they wouldn’t have felt like killing themselves”. If that truly worked, mental health issues wouldn’t even exist.

    Whether or not any one medication works, I think it’s entirely unfair to categorise medications as unnecessary. I don’t believe you’re doing that, but would you mind clarifying your position?

  51. Mark Hansen

    noen, that is shameless quote mining. The meta-analysis you referred to included three different pharmacological types, not just Prozac. You also neglected to mention that the authors published a follow-up article in which they noted that “unfortunately, during its initial coverage, the media often portrayed the results as “antidepressants do not work”, which misrepresented our more nuanced pattern of findings.” Emphasis is mine.
    So if you have a beef with Prozac in particular or antidepressants in general, at least have the good manners to properly quote articles. Perhaps you could also point us to those clinical trials after clinical trials. Beyond the discredited Byrd study, of course. I did find some references but I don’t think you would like their outcomes. http://www.quackwatch.com/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/faith.html

  52. Jon Hanford

    @51 Mark Hansen,

    “noen, that is shameless quote mining. The meta-analysis you referred to included three different pharmacological types, not just Prozac. You also neglected to mention that the authors published a follow-up article in which they noted that “unfortunately, during its initial coverage, the media often portrayed the results as “antidepressants do not work”, which misrepresented our more nuanced pattern of findings.” Emphasis is mine.”

    Thanks for pointing that out (especially the follow-up article). You beat me to it! :)

  53. Matt B.

    The phrase “unreservedly apologize” makes me imagine Kevin Kline dangling Power Balance out a window à la A Fish Called Wanda.

  54. In other words, prozac “works” slightly better than placebo for all but the most severely depressed patients. Didn’t i say that? Yeah, several times now.

    No you didn’t say that. Not even once. What you did say several times was that placebo was better than prozac. Now you have opened your goalposts a bit and allowed that for severe depression, placebo is not in fact better.

    the reason skeptics tend to look down on placebo is because placebo is lying.

  55. Frying Dutchmen

    “Whether or the powerbands lived up to their claims was not my concern. I simply wished to point out that the placebo effect is very powerful, more powerful than many prescription drugs claim to be, and works even if you know its a placebo. The mind is powerful thing and can have very real effects on the body. There are of course limits.”

    Placebo doesn’t work, you think it works but it doesn’t hence why they use placebos when they are researching/testing drugs before they go on the market. I don’t know where you get your information but I think you need to ask for a refund.

  56. truthspeaker

    noen Says:
    December 24th, 2010 at 7:13 pm

    But the placebo effect can be quite significant. Sugar pills can be more effective than so-called powerful medicine, and that’s even when people are told they are getting a sugar pill. Prozac for instance is less effective than placebo

    Citation needed.

    All those touchy feely things that you hate so much? All that “believe in yourself” crap and the “visualize good things” and the positive thinking messages that come wrapped up in religious or quasi religious garb? That stuff actually works and has been shown to work in clinical trial after trial.</blockquote?

    Citation needed.

  57. Speaking of Nelson Muntz: http://nelsonhaha.com/ (I find this very useful. :-))

  58. Mark Hansen

    Guess we won’t get to see those citations from noen.

  59. Jonathan

    I find it hard to believe that anyone in our modern educated society could ever believe such ludicrous promises. A wristband with a hologram sticker that promotes strength? I thought we learned in elementary/middle school not to believe crazy stories. I guess we are still immune to viral marketing, celebrity testimonials, and the placebo effect..

    Read more about it here: http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/6179170/but_power_balance_holograms_do_really.html

NEW ON DISCOVER
OPEN
CITIZEN SCIENCE
ADVERTISEMENT

Discover's Newsletter

Sign up to get the latest science news delivered weekly right to your inbox!

ADVERTISEMENT

See More

ADVERTISEMENT
Collapse bottom bar
+

Login to your Account

X
E-mail address:
Password:
Remember me
Forgot your password?
No problem. Click here to have it e-mailed to you.

Not Registered Yet?

Register now for FREE. Registration only takes a few minutes to complete. Register now »