Dis-Chem refuses to stop selling useless “slimming” muti

Posted 24 August 2011

This article appeared in noseweek August 2011. Permission to reproduce this article here was kindly provided by the editor.

Bloated Claims
Dis-Chem refuses to stop selling useless “slimming” muti

NOSEWEEK has had many a go at snake oil salesmen who distribute products that miraculously enable you to shed pounds, stop smoking or lengthen a penis. But, so far, the supposedly reputable stores that are quite happy to sell this stuff to a gullible public have escaped scrutiny.

Read the rest

Diet drug dodges ASA again

Posted 4 July 2011

An article published in The Witness on 30 Jun 2011 and related to the ongoing scam being sold by Jasmine and Christopher Grindlay of SlimBetti / Slender Max / Hoodia Slender Gel

Author: Anna-Maria Lombard

Republished with permission of the author and

A BRITISH couple who built their South African empire on discredited hoodia diet products have dodged advertising bosses yet again by launching a new “diet gel” that makes the same claims as their other products, sparking a fraud complaint.

Chris and Jasmine Grindlay’s company, Planet Hoodia, was first hauled before the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) in 2008 when medicine consumer activist Dr Harris Steinman complained about the therapeutic claims made about its Hoodia Slender Gel.

Read the rest

Hoodia Slender Gel ~ Slender Max sanctioned!

Hoodia Slender Gel (aka Slender Max) has continued to flagrantly ignore the ASA rulings. Another bunch of complaints were laid with the ASA. This is a company claiming that there product, when rubbed on the skin, will result in weight-loss. Of course, no evidence that it works, and very unlikely – in particularly since it is highly unlikely that hoodia will be absorbed through the skin. Scam? You decide.

Well the ASA may eventually becoming a little tougher? See the ruling below.

Read the rest

Podgy meets dodgy (Slender Gel)

An article from the December 2010 edition of the magazine, noseweek, titled “Podgy meets dodgy”, on the Advertising Standards ruling against Slender Max / Slender Gel / Hoodia Slender Gel, and the two individuals behind this “scam” (and their home address!).

Read the rest

Hoodia Slender Gel / Slender Max

Posted 02 November 2010 

This company continues to advertise to consumers that this product can result in weight loss – in spite of no evidence that this true (and in fact, unlikely to even have a shred of truth to it). Numerous complaints of breach has previously been laid with the ASA. The company has now started taking out full page adverts in magazines targeting women – and simply ignoring the ASA rulings. How do you think the ASA will react once informed about this?

Read on…

Read the rest

Hoodia Slender Gel – ASA ruling

BACKGROUND In a ruling dated 21 June 2010, the Directorate ruled that the respondent was in breach of its earlier ruling dated 9 September 2009, as the respondent’s packaging still used the name “Hoodia” despite the respondent’s original undertaking to remove all references to Hoodia from its packaging. The complainant and the respondent were afforded an opportunity to comment on whether or not sanctions in terms of Clause 14 of the Procedural Guide were appropriate.

Read the rest

Slender Gel (Hoodia Gel), again!

Hoodia Slender Gel made bizarre claims for their product, i.e., rubbing gel containing hoodia onto your body will diminish your appetite and therefore result in “massive weight-loss”. The complaint that there was no evidence for this and that not only were the claims invalid, but the name as well. The ASA agreed. The company, instead of admitting that there is NO evidence to support their claims, changed the name of the product to Slender Max. Again the complaint was made that the name of the product was misleading for no proof existed etc, etc. The company changed their name to Hoodia Gel. An allegation of breach of ASA regulations was made. The ASA agreed, a breach of the previous ruling indeed had occurred.

Read the rest

ASA Ruling: Slender Gel breach

“During March 2010, the complainant lodged a breach allegation regarding the respondent’s website, and a print advertisement that appeared in the Sunday Times magazine of 7 March 2010. It submitted that the respondent continues to make unsubstantiated weight-loss claims and it still uses the name “Slender” for its products. The advertisement appearing in the Sunday Times promoted the respondent’s “Slender MAX” product.”

Read more….

Read the rest

Hoodia Slender Gel-Slender Max-Hoodia Gel

Can you believe the ethics (or morals) of this company? The name of the product, first launched as Hoodia Slender Gel, was ruled against by the ASA for there was no

proof that the product works, therefore the term “Hoodia”  was misleading. The company then changed the name of the product to Slender Gel / Slender Max. Following a subsequent complaint that the term “slender” was misleading for there was no proof that the product could result in weight loss, the ASA agreed and the company had to abandon the name “slender”. So what to do? Well, change your name to Hoodia Gel! I see another complaint to the ASA coming!

The point is made in other posts on this product, that simply, there is no proof that taking hoodia orally results in any appetite suppression or weight loss, and as so few ingredients are absorbed through the skin, that … Read the rest

ASA ruling: Slender Max February 2010

Posted 22 February 2010

This ASA ruling is significant. It rules that not only can Hoodia Slender Gel / Slender Max not make any claims (for there is no proof that the product can result in weight loss or appetite suppression), but that the name “Slender Max” is also misleading – “slender” is a claim. Readers will be aware from previous posts, that I argued that there is no proof that Hoodia taken orally will result in weight loss, and that there is even less evidence that it will be absorbed through the skin.

Read the rest