| U.S. Federal Trade Commission |
FTC News Release, Oct 19, 2004
"Slim Down Solution": Problem Solved
A federal district court has permanently
barred a group of marketers of bogus weight-loss products from
making false claims about the effectiveness of their products.
In January 2003, the Federal Trade Commission charged Slim
Down Solution, LLC, Maderia Management, Inc., and several
related companies and individuals with misrepresenting that
their product, "Slim Down Solution" and its main ingredient,
D-glucosamine, could block dietary fat absorption and cause
consumers to lose weight without changing their diet, in
violation of federal law. In May 2004, the U.S. District Court
for the Southern District of Florida granted summary judgment
against the two sets of defendants and entered an Order and
Judgment for Permanent Injunction and Other Equitable Relief
against each of them. On October 6, 2004, the court entered a
stipulated modification settling one remaining complaint count
and the monetary judgment against Slim Down Solution, LLC, and
its related entities and owners.
The Commission's complaint named Slim Down
Solution, LLC, Slim Down Solution, Inc., S.S.T. Management,
Inc., The KARA Group, LLC, and their principals, Ronald and
Kathleen Alarcon (collectively, the SDS defendants); and
Maderia Management, Inc., Polyglucosamine, Ltd., and their
principal, Steven Pierce (collectively, the Maderia
defendants).
The SDS defendants, based in West Palm
Beach, Florida, advertised and sold Slim Down Solution through
nationally disseminated infomercials that aired on cable
television channels such as Bravo, Comedy Central, and PAX
Cable, and on the Internet at www.slimdownsolution.com. In
addition, the SDS defendants sold their product through a
continuity program, automatically shipping consumers Slim Down
Solution and charging consumers' credit cards or debiting
their bank accounts monthly. The Maderia defendants, based in
Conroe, Texas, have manufactured and sold D-glucosamine
products directly to consumers and other resellers through
their Internet sites, including www.polyglucosamine.com.
Resellers, in turn, promoted the products to consumers under
private labels such as "Fight the Fat," "Everslim," "Mini
Max," and "Slim Down Solution."
The court found that the defendants
deceptively advertised Slim Down Solution and D-glucosamine
(both chitosan derivatives) as "fat trapper" weight-loss
products that could prevent consumers from absorbing up to 20
grams of dietary fat per dose. The court also found that the
SDS defendants falsely claimed that Slim Down Solution causes
weight loss even if consumers eat substantial amounts of foods
high in fat, such as cheeseburgers, french fries, and
cheesecake.
The Permanent Injunction Orders entered by
the court bar the defendants from making these and other false
claims, such as that Slim Down Solution or D-glucosamine cause
substantial weight loss without calorie reduction or exercise.
The orders also prohibit the defendants from claiming, without
competent and reliable scientific proof, that Slim Down
Solution or D-glucosamine cause any weight loss at all. The
defendants further are barred, in connection with the sale of
any product, from making false or unsubstantiated efficacy or
safety claims, or misrepresenting the results of any
scientific test or study.
The court orders hold the defendants jointly
and severally liable for more than $30 million in consumer
redress. To satisfy the $30 million judgment partially, the
court ordered the defendants and third parties holding the
defendants' assets to turn over to the FTC all assets
traceable to Slim Down Solution or D-glucosamine sales.
Further, the orders bar the defendants from selling their
customer lists. The orders also impose on the defendants
compliance reporting and record-keeping requirements.
On December 16, 2003, individual defendants
Ronald Alarcon and Kathleen Alarcon filed for bankruptcy under
Chapter 13 of the Bankruptcy Code. On May 14, 2004, the court
in the FTC action found that the Commission's action against
the Alarcons was not stayed because of the bankruptcy
proceeding and granted the Commission's motion for summary
judgment against them.
As part of the stipulated modification to
the final order entered by the Court on October 6, 2004, the
SDS defendants will dismiss their bankruptcy case and pay
$725,000 in consumer redress. The Alarcons have put up their
Florida home as collateral for payment of this judgment. If
the SDS defendants have lied about their financial situation,
or if they do not pay the required amount by December 28,
2004, they will be liable for the entire original judgment of
$30,135,784. The modified order has an added provision
prohibiting the SDS defendants from enrolling consumers in a
continuity program or billing consumers without their express
consent. The Maderia defendants remain liable for the original
judgment.
The Commission vote to approve the modified
order was 5-0. The modified order was entered by the U.S.
District Court for the Southern District of Florida on October
6, 2004.
The FTC has the following tips for consumers
who are interested in weight-loss products or programs:
- Products and programs that promise
quick and easy weight loss are bogus. To lose weight, you
have to lower your intake of calories and increase your
physical activity.
- The faster you lose weight, the
more likely you are to gain it back. Experts recommend a
goal of about a pound a week.
- There are no miracle weight-loss
products. Be skeptical of products and programs that claim
they can keep weight off permanently. Be skeptical about
exaggerated claims.
Previous alert on this subject
The text in this article was prepared by the U.S. Federal Trade Commission.