Search results for "USN"

Nutritech Diet Meal vs USN – ASA Ruling

Posted 04 May 2015

This is an interesting ruling for, in 2013, we pointed out in a complaint to the ASA that USN was lying about the amount of protein in their product. Now USN has laid a complaint with the ASA against a competitor’s product, making the same argument. However the ASA examined the test report of the competitor and ruled against USN’s complaint.

Read the rest
Continue Reading 0

Nutritech Premium Pure Whey Lite vs USN – ASA Ruling

Posted 04 May 2015

This is an interesting ruling for, in 2013, we pointed out in a complaint to the ASA that USN was lying about the amount of protein in their product. Now USN has laid a complaint with the ASA against a competitor’s product, making the same argument. However the ASA examined the test report of the competitor and ruled against USN’s complaint.

Read the rest
Continue Reading 0

Nutritech Anabolic Mass Builder vs USN – ASA complaint

Posted 04 May 2015

This is an interesting ruling for, in 2013, we pointed out in a complaint to the ASA that USN was lying about the amount of protein in their product. Now USN has laid a complaint with the ASA against a competitor’s product, making the same argument. However the ASA examined the test report of the competitor and ruled against USN’s complaint.

Read the rest
Continue Reading 0

UK ASA acts against USN product claims

Posted 26 March 2015

I am reliably informed that USN has been tasked with withdrawing claims for at least four products from their UK website following a UK ASA intervention* (25 March 2015):

  • USN Xédra-Cut Ultra XT
  • USN Diet Fuel Protein Soup
  • USN Creatine Anabolic Transport System
  • USN VO2 Max Red Blood Cell & Oxygen Booster

* “After consideration by the ASA of complaints received, the following companies and organisations agreed to amend or withdraw advertising without the need for a formal investigation”; ” . . . if the ASA Council decides that an ad is in breach of the Code, the advertisers are told to withdraw or amend it. Because USN (UK) Ltd has already assured us that the advertising you complained about will be amended, we consider there is little to be gained from continuing with a formal investigation . . . ” 

The complainant has shared … Read the rest

Continue Reading 0

New consumer site casts doubt on (USN) supplement claims

Posted 24 March 2015

This previous article published in the West Cape News came to my attention recently. Although published in June 2013, it gives another perspective on one of USN’s products (100% Whey) and how USN will spin a yarn. It also quotes Prof Tim Noakes and his approach to protein supplements.

Discovery Health Professor of Exercise and Sports Science at the University of Cape Town, Tim Noakes, said the difference in protein amount would not have notable effect for athletes. 

This, said Noakes, was because the product is “not working anyway”, the 17 percent difference was “17 percent of nothing”. 

Not a fan of supplements, he said people should be eating real food. 

If athletes wanted more protein, they should eat more eggs, fish and meat, not “falsified nutrients”. 

“We need to eat real food to get all the nutrients we need, not what the manufacturers decide we

Read the rest
Continue Reading 0

USN issues a ‘Take-down’ notice for CamCheck

Posted 18 March 2015

This tells of USN’s CEO, Albe Geldenhuys’ assault on our right to expose and make “fair comment” on the lack of evidence for USN products, and by implication, on the ethics and morals of those involved; and for our (previous) ISP, Hetzner, for not protecting their client and not supporting the principles of the ISPA code of conduct which positions: “ISPA members must respect the constitutional right to freedom of speech and expression”. This aspect is elaborated upon in two articles published in the online community news reporting project, GroundUp:
(Consumer activist forced to move website offshore – Barbara Maregele)
(A stealthy attempt at censorship – Kevin Charleston)

On the 10 March 2015, CamCheck received a “Take-down” request from Hetzner, who in turn received this request from ISPA. ISPA received a letter (see) from USN’s lawyers, Weavind & Weavind, who … Read the rest

Continue Reading 4

USN CreatineX4 – UK ruling

Posted 18 March 2015

While researching UK ASA rulings, we came across this 2009 ruling against USN for the product “CreatineX4 New generation Creatine Ethyl Ester”. A complainant challenged the claims:

1. “Studies have shown that this form of creatine is up to 400% more effective than ordinary creatine” and
2. “CreatineX4 is unmatched in its ability to boost training intensity and recovery”.

The ASA concluded that, in the absence of sound clinical evidence, the claims “Studies have shown that this form of creatine is up to 400% more effective than ordinary creatine” and “CreatineX4 is unmatched in its ability to boost training intensity and recovery” were misleading. The ad breached CAP Code Substantiation, Truthfulness, Fair comparison and Health and beauty.

That was 2009 – yet South African consumers are still being scammed: On the Mkem website, the following statement (supplied by USN) is being made “400% more effective … Read the rest

Continue Reading 1

USN ‘Carb binder’ – the scam continues

Posted 10 February 2015

[note note_color=”#f6f85d”]Update: 18 March 2015
USN/Albe have threatened legal action against Hertzner if the do not implement a ‘take-down’ notice against CamCheck. This is discussed at length here (opens in a new window)[/note]

In a previous complaint to the ASA, the claims made for USN Carb binder was questioned and argued to be false. USN claimed for the product:

  • Starch Intake Inhibitor
  • RAPID WEIGHT CONTROL
  • WEIGHT CONTROL/ CARB BINDER

We argued that there is no evidence to support these claims for this product, which has white kidney bean as its active constituent. Remember: USN first sold this product as USN Carb Blocker but changed the name to Carb Binder when the ASA ruled against the claims (including the name).

In the ruling of the ASA, dated 27 Jun 2014, USN argued that they will be withdrawing the claims: “all its advertising would have Read the rest

Continue Reading 1

Albe Geldenhuys / USN responds to CamCheck posting

Posted 26 January 2015

On the 9 March 2014, CamCheck published, “Albe Geldenhuys of USN, a master scam artist“. This article was picked up by TheHub (a cycling website) which resulted in a flood of visitors to CamCheck, and appears to have reached the attention of Albe Geldenhuys of USN.

[note note_color=”#f6f85d”]Update: 18 March 2015
USN/Albe have threatened legal action against Hertzner if the do not implement a ‘take-down’ notice against CamCheck. This is discussed at length here (opens in a new window)[/note]  

USN has posted a response to their Website which states the following (my response follows):

Read the rest
Continue Reading 10

USN 100% Whey Protein

Posted 13 October 2014

This complaint appears to have slipped between the cracks in that I did not post it to CAMCheck.

In essence, USN’s 100% Whey protein was tested for truthful claims and found to be wanting. The amount of protein in the product was not as indicated on the label. Consumers were being lied to, cheated and ripped off.  A complaint was laid with the ASA. As usual, USN simply claimed that the label was not current and that they had changed the labels and so the ASA had no right to consider the complaint.

Why is this in particular relevant? Well USN recently complained about the untruthfulness of a competitor’s label!

Read the rest
Continue Reading 0