FTC may shock sellers of exercise belts
Don Bauder
May 9, 2002
The Federal Trade Commission launched a war yesterday against hawkers of electronic exercise belts that are touted to take inches off your waist.
They're a waste, says the FTC, which, not surprisingly, targeted three San Diego firms.
The FTC filed three lawsuits, and one is against San Diego's Electronic Products Distribution, AB Energizer and Abflex USA, and their officers. All are located at 7975 Raytheon Road.
On its Web site, AB Energizer boasts that, "AB Energizer uses electrical muscle stimulation to cause muscles to exercise without the sweat, time and effort of other workouts."
The FTC says the claims – particularly of weight reduction and inch loss around the waist – are deceitful.
The whole concept of electronic muscle stimulation without exercise sounds terribly effete to me, but that's obviously not the FTC's concern.
Electronic distributes the AB Energizer, which is promoted heavily through infomercials. Karen Hutchens, spokeswoman for Electronic, claims the company is separate from Abflex.
However, she concedes, as the FTC says, that Martin Van Der Hoeven is president of Abflex and a consultant to AB Energizer. He has an office in Electronic's complex, Hutchens acknowledges. The FTC says that Abflex owns the AB Energizer trademark and registered the Web site for the product.
The FTC complaint, filed in U.S. District Court, names Electronic; Abflex; AB Energizer; Van Der Hoeven; Thomas C. Nelson, president of Electronic; and Holly Hernandez (aka Holly Bryan), the company's lawyer.
They are charged with deceptive acts or practices in the advertising, marketing and sale of electronic exercise belts.
Mentioned prominently in the complaint, but not named as a defendant, is Dr. Michael Skyhar, an Encinitas orthopedic surgeon.
In AB Energizer promotional materials, Skyhar says that the "AB Energizer, with its electrical muscle stimulation, provides a safe way to strengthen any muscle and increase that muscle's mass," according to the FTC.
Skyhar, who says he got involved through Van Der Hoeven, refuses to comment on the FTC complaint or speak for Electronic, but says, "It is not a weight loss device, never was intended to be a weight loss device. Its only purpose is to stimulate tone and tighten muscle. It is effective doing that."
But the FTC points out that, in the infomercial, there is a before/after shot of a person who has lost 40 pounds. At the bottom of the screen, in tiny letters, is the disclaimer, "Results not typical. Individual results may vary." Hmmm.
Other people appear on the infomercial, saying how much weight they have lost, says the FTC.
"The defendants have offered a refund to consumers who do not lose at least two inches off their waists in the first 30 days," says the FTC. "Numerous consumers who sought refunds were unable to reach an operator at the defendants' consumer service phone number, even after waiting on hold for long periods."
In truth, the AB Energizer does not cause loss of weight, inches and fat, says the FTC complaint. Nor does it create well-defined abdominal muscles, as the defendants claim, says the FTC.
"We look forward to presenting the merits of the AB Energizer product to the FTC, and working proactively with the FTC to resolve their concerns," including complaints about the infomercials, says Hutchens.
Walter Gross III, FTC attorney in Washington, D.C., says the FTC would be willing to settle without going to trial, but the defendants "would have to abandon the claims that we allege to be deceptive – weight loss, inch loss, the equivalent of regular exercise, producing well-defined abdominal muscles," he says.
Records show that Van Der Hoeven (sometimes spelled Vanderhoeven), has been involved with a number of companies such as Bun Trainer and Bench Roller, and lives in a Del Mar home assessed at $1.2 million in 2001.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Union-Tribune library researcher Michelle Gilchrist assisted with this column. |
