Reebok used 'very fit woman' in buttock-related deception Reebok has to fork over $25m to the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) for talking out its arse about its butt-toning footwear. The FTC decided that Reebok had falsely claimed its EasyTone walking shoes and flip-flops and its RunTone running shoes could fight the flab on leg and buttock muscles. “The FTC wants national …
Assuming the things work like MBTs.
I've been wearing a pair (of MBTs) on and off for about 18 months, and they definitely have a positive effect.
Currently I have a 45 minute walk to and from work, and I would estimate that a week of this is about equivalent to an hour's yoga. (Focused on the lower back and backs of legs.) Obviously going for a walk in them is not a sensible alternative to the gym, but when it is otherwise dead time, it is worth the effort.
I don't regret spending the £130 on the pair (and I'm a tight git).
Fortunately I don't have an arse like that girl in the advert, because despite the name I am male.
This post has been deleted by its author
Yes, but these are supposed to make it quicker...and don't call me shirley....
It's the same as Special K is low in fat (but stupidly high in sugar), if you eat that, you become a 6ft brunette with an hour glass figure.
Advertising is designed to make you feel shit, but showing what you could be. So as a consequence they more shit you already feel about your life, the more you're likely to belive this shit.
The number of intelligent women I know that got taken in by this and other "super-toning" items (please, FTC, look at Fitflops next) is just beyond belief! Even now, I have pointed them at the FTC website and they STILL prefer to believe that some miracle pair of shoes is going to do what only a proper exercise regime can. I'm not just talking Dizzy Janes here, the number even includes a GP doctor with the medical knowledge that should be able to see right through the scam, but she still insists "oh, they always use models, it's to show the possible outcome"!
Using a model/athlete to demo exercise/diet products and fool the gullible into thinking they can look the same? Without effort, of course.
Surprised that Reebok got spanked. They must have gone out of their way to exceed the already pretty high level of bovine excrement usually being bandied about.
You mean that when adverts for fitness gimmicks show incredibly toned and muscled athletic types demonstrating the products those people *didn't* get their bodies from simply using that product but actually do a lot of *other* exercise *and* eat properly?
My illusions are shattered...!
Reebok, like Nike, do make some very nice quality running shoes. But they're the expensive ones. The bottom of the range stuff they make is really no different to the no-name bottom of the range stuff. Like Intel, they have the expensive stuff, and then the Celerons. Don't assume just because they make some very good expensive shoes, that the cheap ones are any better.
If you want some extremely good specialist shoes, by the way, check out the ones by inov8. No, I'm nothing to do with the company - I've just always liked their shoes a lot and they're worth a look if you want to be as fit as the lady in the ad. (Small print: some running may also be required).
Pretty much every commercial for any 'health' or 'beauty' product is guilty of this.
How about the ones where some average looking guy hoses himself down with some obnoxious smelling cologne spray and suddenly women are tearing his clothes off?
Or the ones for women's mascara showing a model with what looks like a ferret glued to each eyelid?
Full stop. Reebok's mistake, IM!HO, was to cite specific figures, leading one to assume that real research had been done. Tsk, tsk. Take a page from the supplement market: use "may", "has been shown to", and "our customers have reported" statements that sound scientifical enough to fool the masses but are not legally actionable. Armor up the legal diapers with a mice type "This product has not been evaluated by [name of governing authority]" disclaimer across the, er, bottom of the advert. Can not believe that for what Reebok charges for their product they can not afford to pay someone to vet their bullshit before it airs.
That was ridiculous. This actually aired on TV? It screened like an amateur porn film where the girl ended up saying no. Somehow this feels like it wasn't meant to air.
On the other hand, cute girl.
Director: Okay, now, we need you to ride this guy with these shoes on, for $25.
Girl: No way.
D: Show your breasts?
G:No
D: Make Awkwardly wide stances while facing away from the camera so we can focus on your ass(ets), while you spout random bullshit?
G: Alright, but quadruple the pay.
At least the girl was able to get paid something decent (I hope).
She's quite pretty, and I love the fact that she hasn't had her chesticles turned into huge Bulgarian airbags, but she does not have an arse. Nothing there.
I mean, my GF has an unfortunately flat arse, but compared to this fitness bunny, she's Ms. Lopez + the whole female cast of Sir Mixalot's most famous video (and pretty much every hip hop video ever since) combined.
So, dear world, and especially my dear commentards, where the holy copulation is this going? Why do you find this appalingly flat piece of posterior musculature so appealing?
(Sing the title to the tune of The Pixies' Where is my mind for extra loveliness.)
"claimed......could fight the flab on leg and buttock muscles"
No. they don't claim that. They do claim that they tone the muscles. Toning and fighting flab are different things (and targeted fat loss is a complete myth). Although try telling that to women that attend thighs bums and tums classes at the gym to develop magnificent abs and arses which then remain hidden under a big pile of flab.
At the risk of sounding like reverend lovejoy's wife I would have thought pornography laws were more appropriate.
The unnatural angle she walks to the shoes at clearly shows she was told what the producer wanted, in fact she goes to noticeable effort to make sure her posterior is camera facing even when her face is.
As for the camera work, it looks like a teenager who just got asked to film his mate and the misses.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
