USN Fat Block – Fat chance

03 October 2014

As usual, USN show how untrustworthy USN are. First this product claimed to be able to block fat, but the ASA ruled against the claims being made. So USN simply changed the product’s name to Fat Binder. The ASA ruled against the claims for this product and the name. What has USN done? Simply changed the product’s name to Fibre binder! Same ingredient, same dose. Unbelievable. Major scam artists!

Will the ASA eventually hit them with very severe sanctions?

Read the rest

USN Phedra-Cut Lipo XT – ASA breach ruling

02 October 2014

On 14 July 2014 the complainant submitted a breach complaint against the respondent’s website advertising for USN Phedra-Cut Lipo XT product. He referred to a previous adverse ruling USN Phedra-Cut Lipo XT / MM Davy / 20382 (26 July 2012), as well as the original ruling in this matter, and argued that the respondent’s continued use of the claims “ALL DAY WEIGHT CONTROL” and “May assist in weight control are clearly in breach of the relevant rulings and warrant sanctions against a serial offender.

Read the rest

USN 19-Testo Mass – ASA ruling

Posted 28 July 2014

In USN 19-Testo Mass / H Steinman / 2014-700F (17 April 2014) the Directorate accepted USN’s voluntary undertaking to remove the offending claims from its marketing material, including its website, until the product was approved and registered by the Medicines Control Council. The undertaking was accepted on condition that the claims in question were not used again in future in their current format, or at least not until approved and registered by the MCC. A new complaint was laid arguing that similar claims were still being made.

The ASA concluded that comparing the original material complained of with that currently under scrutiny, it cannot be denied that material changes have been made. In fact, the website advertising complained of by the complainant does not contain offending claims that were dealt with in the original ruling.

Read the rest

USN “Carb Binder” – scam product, ASA ruling

Posted 28 July 2014

A consumer lodged a consumer complaint against advertising appear on USN’s website The relevant page promotes the respondent’s “Carb Binder” product, which is punted as a “STARCH INTAKE INHIBITOR”, and appears under the banner of “RAPID WEIGHT CONTROL” products.  USN have renamed the product Carb Binder after the ASA ruling against “Carb Blocker”! The complainant found the references to rapid weight control, or weight control in general to be unsubstantiated. He briefly outlined the research consulted to reach his conclusion, adding that there was no proof that StarchLite (the ingredient used in this product) is equivalent to the ingredient evaluated in the published studies from which the complainant draws basis for his grounds for complaint.

Read the rest

USN 19 TESTO MASS – ASA ruling

Posted 07 May 2014

USN claimed that this product is an “Ergogenic aid” and “Testo Booster”. A complaint was laid claiming that these claims are not justified and cannot be proved to be true.

USN responded by saying that the claims would be removed from the website and the product.

Read the rest

Albe Geldenhuys of USN, a master scam artist?

Posted 9 March 2014

USN was founded in South Africa by Albe Geldenhuys. Meet a great salesman – and also one of South Africa’s biggest scam artists.

Why are we making such a bold claim?

Read the rest

USN Pure Protein Bar – ASA ruling

Posted 10 October 2013

As with other USN products, the claims are simply outrageous and mostly nonsense. USN claims for their Pure Protein Bar that eating this will result in the following benefits: “• Promotes lean muscle tissue gains, • Muscle protection, • Weight management, • Sufficient glycogen for energy …” 

We said, nonsense! Rubbish! Show us the money! 

USN were unable to.

Read the rest

USN Phedra-Cut Hardcore – ASA Ruling

Posted 10 June 2013

This is a convoluted ruling and essentially consist of two aspects:

1. A new complaint ruling by the ASA against USN Phedra-Cut Hardcore, and

2. An appeal by USN against sanctions being instituted against USN.

Difficulty to exactly fathom out the result of the appeal – appears that the Appeal committee accepted that USN should have been consulted prior to sanctions being instituted, but nonetheless will impose sanctions but first requesting from USN what sanctions they feel are appropriate!

Read the rest

USN Fat Block – Lie, no proof that it blocks fat

Posted 07 May 2013

This is a great example of how pseudoscience has been utilised, i.e., evidence from a computer model used to claim an ingredient will have a beneficial effect in humans, without proving it. A consumer laid a complaint against USN Fat Block that claims “CLINICALLY PROVEN”, “QUALITY INGREDIENTS”, and “Supports Weight Loss”. In fact, similar claims for the ingredient used, Neopuntia, was previously ruled against by the ASA. (It is clear from this that USN cannot be trusted at all.) 

The ASA examined the evidence supplied by USN and agreed, there is no proof that this product works at all, and therefore ruled against the claims as well as the name of the product.

Read the rest

USN Phedra-Cut LipoXT product – ASA ruling

Posted 7 April 2013

 A consumer laid a complaint against a range of claims being made for USN Phedra-Cut LipoXT. The ASA weighed up the evidence in support of the claims and found it to be insufficient, and ruled against USN concluding: USN has to “[R]efrain from using the advertisement and claims again in future unless new substantiation has been submitted and accepted by means of a new Directorate ruling (refer Clause 4.1.7 of Section II of the Code).”

Read the rest