Lipozene, a weight-loss supplement containing a type of fiber called glucomannan, is being promoted as a magic bullet for weight loss. The evidence supporting this claim is weak at best as aptly indicated in this story’s headline. This story was well researched and did a good job evaluating and refuting Lipozene’s weight-loss claims based upon review of the medical literature and by interviews with independent experts. Lipozene’s manufacturer, the Obesity Research Institute, did not respond to requests for justification of these claims. As pointed out in this article, the Obesity Research Institute paid a large settlement in response to the Federal Trade Commission charge that they made false and misleading claims about two of its other products containing the same fiber compound as Lipozene. This story did a very good job of documenting its "bottom line" – that despite aggressive marketing there is no evidence that Lipozene is a "weight-loss breakthorugh". This story is credible and was well done.
A one month supply of Lipozene can cost up to $90 as reported in this story. This article also pointed out that other companies sell similar supplements for a much lower cost.
This story is clear and accurate in its overall message that there appear to be no weight-loss benefits from taking Lipozene.
This story uses expert opinion to point out the severe diarrhea and gastrointestinal distress would be adverse effects of taking the very large doses of the glucomannan fiber in Lipozene that might help someone to lose weight. This story also noted that glucomannan is not FDA approved as a weight-loss supplement.
This authors of this story should be commended for their thorough research in medical literature and in consultation with independent experts to verify the lack of evidence supporting Lipozene’s weight loss claims. The headline of this story "Fiber-based Lipozene’s weight-loss claims rest on thin evidence" sums up the lack of credible evidence on which Lipozene bases its weight-loss claims. This story does a good job at pointing out that Lipozene’s "clinically proven" "fat-reducing power " does not appear to be based on any data published in the medical literature. Perhaps this claim is based upon a small study reporting that individuals taking a fiber supplement similar to Lipozene on a very low calorie diet lost weight. Mathematically the amount of weight lost would be accounted for by diet alone. This story debunks Lipozene claim that people can lose weight without dieting or exercisisng by citing current medical opinion, and common sense. The story does point out that the Federal Trade Commission has taken legal action against the Obesity Research Institute for making false claims about its other gucomannan containing products. As a footnote, the Obesity Research Institute does not appear to conduct any research despite its "lofty" name.
This story does not engage in disease mongering but clearly points out that the makers of Lipozene do. The parent company, Obesity Research Institute, capitalizes on the public’s desire for a quick fix weight loss pill.
This story took a well balanced approach to presenting both sides of the Lipozene story. Beneficial claims by the manufacturer were balanced with comments by two independent experts who expressed the opposite opinion. The story also tried unsuccessfully to verify claims that could not be otherwise verified with the manufacturer.
The only significant omission ofthe story was not including basic information on weight-loss. This story briefly mentions diet and exercise, but could more clearly state these are the proven ways to lose weight. Also, a brief sentence about gastric bypass surgery in cases of severe obesity could have easily been included.
There is no shortage of ‘get thin quick products’ being aggressively marketed in the media and widely available in drugstores trhoughout the country. Lipozene is no excpetion, as this story points out at the onset.
This story makes it clear that weight-loss supplements including Lipozene are common place.
We are confident the story did not rely on a news release.
Systematic, Criteria-Driven
Monday at #ADA2021, an infectious disease epidemiologist, a journalist, and a researcher shared perspectives on communication of risk in the era of COVID-19: http://ow.ly/ROfR30rMeE7 @AstleyCM @garyschwitzer @berthahidalgo @ADA_DiabetesPro
Shoutouts to @susan_bewley @drkevinknopf @MichaelBaum11 in this call for more than fawning coverage from press releases for these kinds of stories.
Also, linked history inside goes back 5 years just on Grail apparently trying to become Holy Grail. https://twitter.com/garyschwitzer/status/1408849696416841731
Comments
Please note, comments are no longer published through this website. All previously made comments are still archived and available for viewing through select posts.
Our Comments Policy
But before leaving a comment, please review these notes about our policy.
You are responsible for any comments you leave on this site.
This site is primarily a forum for discussion about the quality (or lack thereof) in journalism or other media messages (advertising, marketing, public relations, medical journals, etc.) It is not intended to be a forum for definitive discussions about medicine or science.
We will delete comments that include personal attacks, unfounded allegations, unverified claims, product pitches, profanity or any from anyone who does not list a full name and a functioning email address. We will also end any thread of repetitive comments. We don”t give medical advice so we won”t respond to questions asking for it.
We don”t have sufficient staffing to contact each commenter who left such a message. If you have a question about why your comment was edited or removed, you can email us at feedback@healthnewsreview.org.
There has been a recent burst of attention to troubles with many comments left on science and science news/communication websites. Read “Online science comments: trolls, trash and treasure.”
The authors of the Retraction Watch comments policy urge commenters:
We”re also concerned about anonymous comments. We ask that all commenters leave their full name and provide an actual email address in case we feel we need to contact them. We may delete any comment left by someone who does not leave their name and a legitimate email address.
And, as noted, product pitches of any sort – pushing treatments, tests, products, procedures, physicians, medical centers, books, websites – are likely to be deleted. We don”t accept advertising on this site and are not going to give it away free.
The ability to leave comments expires after a certain period of time. So you may find that you’re unable to leave a comment on an article that is more than a few months old.
You might also like