Physics Forums - Product Claims http://www.physicsforums.com Discuss and debunk products that seem too good to be true! en Wed, 22 May 2013 14:20:28 GMT vBulletin 60 http://www.physicsforums.com/images/physicsforums/misc/rss.jpg Physics Forums - Product Claims http://www.physicsforums.com Tesla S: The Perfect Car? http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=692283&goto=newpost Sat, 18 May 2013 00:35:00 GMT Or, just almost perfect? 99 out of 100? I know this isn't a claim by Tesla, just a review, but (The review itself isn't available without a subscription.):
Quote:
Consumer Reports, self-promoted as the largest independent consumer-testing organization in the world, recently subjected Tesla's all-electric vehicle to its standard gamut of automotive tests. The results were nothing short of extraordinary, as the model came just one point short of acing the 50-test evaluation regimen. Its final score of 99 out of 100 meant the Model S "performed better than any other car we've ever tested," said Jake Fisher, director of auto testing at the publication (Lexus owners will correctly argue that the 2007 Lexus LS 460L also earned a score of 99 in a Consumer Reports comparison years ago).
http://www.cnn.com/2013/05/15/opinio...est/index.html

A synopses is here: http://money.cnn.com/2013/05/09/auto...rts/index.html

1. Obvious: If it is only tied for highest score, why say it was the best and give it an almost perfect score? Sounds like something a used car salesman would say to you.
2. Best/perfect versus what/with what criteria? This is the bigger issue:

I don't doubt that the Model S is an awesome car, but to be just short of perfect, I can't see how it is being measured against anything but itself. Because different types of cars have different purposes, I would think it should probably be versus other cars in its type. Because clearly the Model S doesn't have the best - much less perfect - towing capacity, acceleration, range, cornering or kitchen.

If you rank it against other sedans, it has some clear and serious flaws; the normal flaws that all electric cars have: range, charging time, charging station availability, cost (value), performance in adverse weather, etc.

I suppose you could rank it soley against other electrics and call it the best, but near perfect? I think it has a little ways to go just in terms of usability due to the lack of charging stations and time it take to charge -- and I think that should matter.

And these are just the obvious/inherent flaws of electrics. I have a hard time believing everything else about it is perfect -- but as said I haven't seen the review itself yet.

Moreover, since it is a new car, there is no data on reliability/longevity/service cost, nor has it been crash tested (!). At best it should get an incomplete on that score.

More from the USA Today opinion:
Quote:
No car currently manufactured deserves the coveted best car trophy, and that includes Consumer Reports' 99-point Tesla Model S. Personal transportation needs are uniquely individual, based on occupation, regional location, household size, income and, of course, taste. Giving a vehicle a near-perfect score is acceptable — and there will undoubtedly be others just as impressive — but assuming that one vehicle trumps others and satisfies all equally is misguided and presumptuous.

To those who consider the Model S the world's best car, I throw out this question: What's the world's best shoe?
What are they thinking? Is this a publicity ploy by Consumer Reports? They are supposed to be above those types of games. ]]> Product Claims russ_watters http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=692283 <![CDATA[How Safe are "Eclipse Glasses"?]]> http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=692110&goto=newpost Thu, 16 May 2013 21:46:46 GMT Just how safe are these Eclipse Glasses? Ever since I learned that the sun actually burns holes in the retina of your eye, I've been paranoid of using any device that will allow "safe" viewing of the sun.

From what I've been told, everyone has at least 3-6 "holes" in the retina, from looking at the sun as a baby (I guess it takes them 3-6 times to figure out "looking at the sun = BAD").

http://eclipseshades.com/


Quote:
Safe Solar Glasses for Australian Eclipse 2012. Absolutely safe for direct solar viewing of solar eclipses sun spots and other solar phenomenon. All of Our Eclipse Glasses Solar Viewing Materials are Optical Density 5 or Greater and are "CE" certified which meets the transmission requirements of scale 12-16 of EN 169/1992. Certified by BSI #0086 Notified Body HP2 4SQ. Meets the 2012 Transmission Requirements of EN 1836:2005 & AS/NZS 1338.1:1992 for Eclipse filters. Lenses are made of our exclusive scratch resistant optical density 5, "Black Polymer" material. Eclipse Shades filter out 100% of harmful ultra-violet, 100% of harmful infrared, and 99.999% of intense visible light.
]]> Product Claims Astrum http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=692110 Real Dose - Dr. Steven Sisskind M.D. http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=691348&goto=newpost Sun, 12 May 2013 17:27:56 GMT Is anyone familiar with a product named "RealDose"? It's a weight loss product promoted by a Dr. Steven Sisskind M.D.

4 areas of concern... http://www.realdose.com/store/weight...mula-number-1/

They site this research... http://www.realdose.com/wlf1_research.html

Here is the Dr's video... http://www.realdose.com/losetheweigh...utm_medium=cpc ]]> Product Claims enosis_ http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=691348 <![CDATA["Muscle Activation Techniques"?]]> http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=690220&goto=newpost Mon, 06 May 2013 23:50:40 GMT I'm working on getting more physically active and fit, and I've received a recommendation for a (patented, naturally) exercise program (or perhaps "paradigm" is a better word) called "Muscle Activation Techniques" (main site). I know there's a lot of BS in the fitness world, and the abundance of acronyms and buzz words—and lack of scientific studies—appearing on that webpage have me a bit wary. I was hoping someone with a better knowledge of how the human body works could allay or confirm my skepticism.

There's not a lot there on the nature of the technique (which is probably another red flag), but the most detailed explanation seems to be in the FAQ here. Further details are here and here.

As I've said, I can't find any studies on the efficacy of the technique. However, it would be helpful if PF members could comment on the theoretical foundation on which MAT is based; that is, the idea that: "every injury may have a negative impact on our neuromuscular function and that over time, the communication between the nervous system and the muscular system becomes negatively altered. If this altered communication is not regularly addressed, then the cumulative effect may be a progressive weakness of the muscular system as a whole, resulting in an increase susceptibility to pain, injury and/or degenerative issues."

Is this notion of 'muscle weakness (defined in MAT as decreased ability to contract efficiently) due to compromised communication between the muscular and nervous systems' sound? If so, then is there anything in the FAQ's overview of the program that gives it plausibility as a remedy? And, if that's the case, then is it something genuinely novel, or something that would tend to happen during any well-rounded exercise regimen? ]]> Product Claims LastOneStanding http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=690220 Rabbit TV http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=689071&goto=newpost Wed, 01 May 2013 08:31:02 GMT I just acquired this magic jack looking device called Rabbit TV https://www.rabbittv.com/ Its a USB device that you plug into your laptop... I just acquired this magic jack looking device called Rabbit TV

https://www.rabbittv.com/

Its a USB device that you plug into your laptop that's supposed to get you thousands of free TV channels. I read some online reviews that didn't look so hot. So I don't want to plug it in until I do more research.

Anybody have one of these and care to comment? ]]> Product Claims DiracPool http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=689071 <![CDATA[The Centrum 'study']]> http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=687584&goto=newpost Wed, 24 Apr 2013 00:18:21 GMT Centrum multivitamin has been running a series of commercials (http://www.ispot.tv/ad/77l_/centrum-silver-studies) that run something like this: ... Centrum multivitamin has been running a series of commercials that run something like this:

Quote:
My wife takes Centrum Silver. I’ve been on the fence about it.
Then I read an article about a study that looked at the long-term health benefits of taking multivitamins.
They used Centrum Silver for the study.
Sooo… I guess my wife was right.
Sooo... Why don't you tell us what the study found? Was there a benefit? :rolleyes: ]]> Product Claims Borg http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=687584