2004

Weight-Loss

Advertising 

Survey

Staff Report

Federal Trade Commission

April 2005
Federal Trade Commission

Deborah Platt Majoras Chairman

Orson Swindle Commissioner

Thomas B. Leary Commissioner

Pamela Jones Harbour Commissioner

Jon Leibowitz Commissioner
Table of Contents

Executive Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

I. Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Red Flags Initiative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

II. 2004 Survey Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

A. Media Surveyed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

B. Product Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

C. 2001 Survey Comparisons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

D. Red Flag Claims . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

E. Other Advertising Techniques . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

F. Magazine Advertising: A Historical Comparison . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

III. Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

Endnotes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Appendix A: Collection Methodology

Appendix B: Advertising Coding

2004 Weight-Loss Advertising Survey

1

Executive Summary

Beginning in February 2003, the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC” or 

“Commission”) asked for the media’s help in preventing the dissemination of 

facially false advertising claims for weight-loss products.1 Specifically, the 

FTC encouraged the media not to disseminate weight-loss advertisements that 

contained any of seven facially false (“Red Flag”) claims. In 2004, the FTC 

staff conducted a survey of weight-loss advertisements for certain products in 

print, television, and radio to evaluate the effect of the Commission’s initiative 

and accompanying media education campaign. In addition, where there were 

comparable data, FTC staff compared the results of the 2004 survey with data 

from a weight-loss advertising survey the FTC conducted in 2001.2 In general, 

analysis of the 2004 survey results suggest that, compared to 2001, there has 

been a significant decline in the incidence of Red Flag weight-loss claims in the 

television, radio, and print advertisements included in the survey. Although this 

decline is consistent with results the Commission hoped its Red Flags initiative 

would have, we cannot determine with certainty whether the observed results 

were the result of the FTC’s initiative. In addition, the decline in Red Flag 

claims does not necessarily imply a decline in deceptive weight-loss claims more 

generally.

I. Background

The rapid increase in overweight and obesity in America has created serious 

public health problems. According to the Surgeon General, six out of every 10 

Americans are overweight or obese.3 The estimated cost of obesity exceeds $100 

billion per year.4

Many Americans turn to weight-loss aids to trim pounds, whether to 

supplement a diet and exercise plan or as a substitute. Industry sources estimate 

that consumers spend billions of dollars a year on products and services that 

purport to promote weight loss.5

Many weight-loss products, however, do not live up to their promises. In 

September 2002, the FTC issued a staff report entitled Weight-Loss Advertising 

Report: An Analysis of Current Trends.

6

 This report, which was based on 

weight-loss advertisements collected in 2001 (the “2001 survey”), was a 

comprehensive, albeit non-scientific, review of the state of weight-loss product 

and service advertising. The survey included 300 ads, from a wide variety of 

media, that were collected in February through May 2001. The report concluded 

that false or misleading claims were pervasive in weight-loss advertising and 

documented a “downward spiral to deception in weight-loss advertising.”7 Of 

the advertisements included in the 2001 survey for nonprescription drugs, 

dietary supplements, creams, wraps, diet patches, and devices that appeared in 
2004 Weight-Loss Advertising Survey

2

print or on television or radio, 49% contained at least one almost certainly false 

representation.8

 Red Flags Initiative

This widespread deception persisted even in the face of aggressive 

Commission law enforcement action. In the last 10 years, the Commission has 

brought more than 100 cases challenging false or misleading claims in advertising 

for weight-loss products. The Commission also has disseminated widely 

consumer education materials warning consumers to be skeptical of “too good to 

be true” weight-loss claims and emphasizing the importance of diet and exercise 

in losing weight. The prevalence of facially false and misleading weight-loss ads 

– despite the Commission’s consumer education initiatives and aggressive law 

enforcement in the weight-loss area – sparked a search for new approaches to 

address the problem. In November 2002, the Commission held a public workshop 

on deception in weight-loss advertising to explore new strategies.9 

In preparation for the workshop, the Commission in September 2002 solicited 

public comment on whether the current state of the science was sufficient to 

determine that certain common weight-loss claims were false.10 At the workshop, 

10 scientific experts in nutrition and the study and treatment of overweight and 

obesity evaluated a number of weight-loss claims typically found in weight-loss 

advertising and considered whether the claims promised results that were not 

scientifically feasible. The discussion was limited to claims for products available 

over-the-counter: nonprescription drugs, dietary supplements, creams, wraps, 

devices, and patches (collectively, “covered weight-loss products”). Overall, the 

experts believed that the identified claims about these weight-loss products were 

simply not feasible based on the current state of the science. 

Following the workshop, an outreach program was initiated to encourage the 

media’s voluntary efforts to adopt and implement screening standards that would 

reduce the level of facially false advertising for covered weight-loss products 

appearing in their venues. This initiative included meetings with media trade 

associations and individual companies. In addition, as part of the initiative, in 

February 2003, then-Chairman Timothy J. Muris spoke to the Cabletelevision 

Advertising Bureau and met with industry members to ask the industry, in his 

words, to “do the right thing” by screening out false weight-loss ads.11 In that 

speech, Chairman Muris identified the specific claims at issue. In October 

2003, Chairman Muris made a similar call to action in a speech to the Magazine 

Publishers of America.12 Other Commissioners echoed this message in various 

speeches and publications.13

In December 2003, the FTC issued a staff report entitled Deception in 

Weight-Loss Advertising Workshop: Seizing Opportunities and Building 

Partnerships to Stop Weight-Loss Fraud.14 Based on the discussions at the 

2002 workshop – together with written comments received before and after 

the workshop, the published literature, and the Commission’s investigative 
2004 Weight-Loss Advertising Survey

3

experience – the staff compiled a list of claims that are not scientifically feasible 

for the covered weight-loss products. With some minor modifications, this list 

reflected the claims identified in the Commission’s Federal Register Notice 

announcing the workshop.15 At the same time that it issued the Workshop Report, 

the Commission also released a media reference guide entitled Red Flag: Bogus 

Weight Loss Claims.

16 These claims – the “Red Flag” claims – are:

Consumers who use the advertised product can lose two pounds or 

more per week (over four or more weeks) without reducing caloric 

intake and/or increasing their physical activity.

Consumers who use the advertised product can lose substantial 

weight while still enjoying unlimited amounts of high calorie foods.

The advertised product will cause permanent weight loss (even when 

the user stops using the product).

The advertised product will cause substantial weight loss through 

the blockage of absorption of fat or calories.

Consumers who use the advertised product (without medical 

supervision) can safely lose more than three pounds per week for a 

period of more than four weeks.

Users can lose substantial weight through the use of the advertised 

product that is worn on the body or rubbed into the skin. 

The advertised product will cause substantial weight loss for all 

users.17

II. 2004 Survey Analysis

The survey discussed in this report was conducted to determine whether there 

was any discernible change in the incidence of Red Flag claims in the wake of 

the Commission’s Red Flags initiative.18 To make this determination, a sample 

of weight-loss advertisements collected from February through May 2004 was 

compared to a similar sample from the 2001 survey. In general, using the Red 

Flag criteria, this comparison suggests that there has been a significant decline 

in the incidence of Red Flag weight-loss claims in the television, radio, and 

print advertisements included in the survey. Specifically, in the comparable ads 

reviewed from the 2001 survey, nearly half (49%) contained at least one facially 

false Red Flag claim. By comparison, 15% of the 2004 weight-loss ads made one 

or more Red Flag claims. It must be noted, however, that neither the 2001 nor the 

2004 survey was designed to produce results that can be generalized to all weightloss advertising. Moreover, the absence of Red Flag claims does not mean that 

the advertisements contained no deceptive weight-loss claims at all. In addition, 

although these results suggest that there has been significant improvement 
2004 Weight-Loss Advertising Survey

4

in the occurrence of Red Flag claims since 2001, they do not prove that the 

improvement is the result of the Red Flags initiative.

A. Media Surveyed19

To conduct the current study, FTC staff analyzed a sample of 293 

advertisements collected in February through May 2004 (“collection period”) 

from broadcast and cable television (including infomercials), radio, magazines, 

newspapers, supermarket tabloids, and free-standing inserts (“FSIs”).20 These 

are all media in which it is possible for a third party to screen the advertisements 

before running them (in contrast to advertisements contained in Internet websites 

or spam). The breakdown of these advertisements by media is provided in 

Table 1.

Table 1: Advertisements by Media

Media Source Number of distinct 

advertisements in sample

Magazines 127

Tabloids 30

Newspapers/FSIs 44

Television (short-form) 28

Television Infomercials 3

Radio 61

B. Product Types 

Because the Commission’s Red Flag initiative only relates to claims for 

certain weight-loss products (the “covered weight-loss products,” that is, nonprescription drugs, dietary supplements, diet patches, creams, wraps, and 

devices), the survey was limited to advertisements for that category. The vast 

majority (91%) of the surveyed advertisements were for dietary supplements. 

Advertisements for creams made up 5% of the survey, wraps 2%, and patches 

1%.21 For the same types of non-prescription products included in the 2001 

survey, 88% of the advertisements were for dietary supplements, 6% for patches 

and creams, and another 6% for wraps.22 The 2004 survey did not cover 

advertisements for prescription drugs, exercise equipment, meal replacement 

products like breakfast shakes or breakfast bars, low-calorie foods or drinks, 

liposuction or other forms of surgery, hypnosis, or special diets such as lowcarbohydrate or low-calorie diets.

C. 2001 Survey Comparisons

To make comparisons between the 2004 and the 2001 surveys, it was 

necessary to adjust for certain differences between the surveys. The 2001 survey 

had looked at weight-loss advertisements disseminated in a broader range of 
2004 Weight-Loss Advertising Survey

5

media, including broadcast and cable television (including infomercials), radio, 

magazines, newspapers (including FSIs in Sunday newspapers), supermarket 

tabloids, direct mail, unsolicited commercial e-mail (spam), and Internet websites 

between February and May 2001. Thus, it included advertisements in media 

where third-party screening cannot occur. The 2001 survey also had included all 

types of products and services, including dietary supplements, meal replacements, 

hypnosis, food, diet plans and centers, transdermal patches and creams, and 

wraps. It thus included a wider array of products than were included in the 2004 

sample.

Therefore, the staff analysis of the 2001 advertisements published in the 

Weight-Loss Advertising Report generally combined data on all weight-loss 

products and services and covered all forms of dissemination.23 Given the 

different scope of the 2001 and 2004 surveys and the resulting differences in the 

coding of the 2001 and 2004 advertisements, in some instances it is not possible 

to compare data from the two surveys on certain questions. For example, some 

data were collected in 2001 that were not collected in 2004 and vice versa. 

In other instances, however, it was possible to re-tabulate the 2001 data 

so they could be compared to the 2004 data.24 Focusing on products covered 

by the Red Flags initiative reduced the original 2001 sample from close to 300 

advertisements to 178. We further narrowed the sample to 98 advertisements by 

looking only at radio, television, magazines, newspapers, and tabloids (in other 

words, media where screening can occur). Each of these ads was coded, before 

the release of the Weight-Loss Advertising Report, on whether it contained at least 

one Red Flag Claim (although not as to each specific Red Flag claim contained in 

the ads).

D. Red Flag Claims

In the current survey, 15% (45 of 293) of distinct advertisements made Red 

Flag claims.25 In contrast, about half (49%, 48 of 98) of the 2001 advertisements 

for covered weight-loss products that appeared in print media, or on television 

or radio, contained at least one Red Flag claim.26 This comparison suggests that, 

judged by the absence of facially false Red Flag claims, weight-loss advertising 

has improved since 2001 in the advertisements surveyed, in the media capable of 

being screened by the third-party medium disseminating the advertisement.

For the first Red Flag Claim it is possible to compare the 2004 and 2001 

survey data as to prevalence. This claim, which is perhaps the most common, is 

that consumers who use the advertised product can lose two pounds or more per 

week (over four or more weeks) without reducing caloric intake and/or increasing 

their physical activity. Of the advertisements surveyed in 2004, 5% (16 of 293) 

of advertisements communicated this Red Flag claim. In contrast, in 2001, 43% 

(42 of 98) of the advertisements for covered weight-loss products that appeared 

in print media or on television or radio contained claims that users can lose two 

pounds or more per week over four or more weeks without dieting or exercising.27 
2004 Weight-Loss Advertising Survey

6

The frequency of the other Red Flag claims in 2004 ads are set forth below in 

Table 2.

TABLE 2: Frequency of Red Flag Claims28

Red Flag Claim

Number of 

Ads in 2004 

Sample 

Containing 

Claim

Percentage 

of Ads in 

2004 Sample 

Containing 

Claim

RF#1 Consumers who use the advertised 

product can lose two pounds or more a week 

(over four or more weeks) without reducing 

caloric intake and/or increasing their physical 

activity

16 5%

RF#2 Consumers who use the advertised 

product can lose substantial weight while still 

enjoying unlimited amounts of high calorie 

foods.29

11 4%

RF#3 The advertised product will cause 

permanent weight loss (even when the user 

stops using the product).

13 4%

RF#4 The advertised product will cause 

substantial weight loss through the blockage of 

absorption of fat or calories.

9 3%

RF#5 Consumers who use the advertised 

product (without medical supervision) can safely 

lose more than three pounds per week for a 

period of more than four weeks.

10 3%

RF#6 Users can lose substantial weight through 

the use of the advertised product that is worn on 

the body or rubbed into the skin.

11 4%

RF#7 The advertised product will cause 

substantial weight loss for all users.30 13 4%

E. Other Advertising Techniques

In addition to analyzing the advertisements found in the 2004 survey for the 

prevalence of Red Flag claims, FTC staff analyzed the advertisements for the 

prevalence of other advertising claims and techniques employed. Unlike Red 

Flag claims, these techniques are not necessarily deceptive. They are reported 

here solely for the purpose of providing a better understanding of weight-loss 

product advertising. 
2004 Weight-Loss Advertising Survey

7

1. Safety and Efficacy Claims

About one in five advertisements (19%, 56 of 293 advertisements) 

specifically claim that the product is safe.31 Less than half (44%, 130 of 293 

advertisements) of the advertisements in the survey claim that the product was 

tested or proven effective for weight loss.32

Eighteen percent (53 of 293) of the advertisements represented that a medical 

professional such as a doctor, nurse, or hospital recommends the product. This 

category includes advertisements claiming that a specific doctor, pharmacist, 

nurse, or hospital recommends the product; stating that doctors generally endorse 

the product; or featuring someone dressed the way a doctor might dress (for 

example, in a lab coat with a stethoscope) to imply that doctors support the 

product.33

Finally, one third of the advertisements (34%, 100 of 293 advertisements) 

promise that the product works quickly.

2. Diet and Exercise Disclosures

The 2004 survey also tracked for the first time whether the advertisement 

expressly told consumers that they would have to diet or exercise to lose weight. 

Almost half of the advertisements (46%, 135 of 293 advertisements) informed 

consumers that, to lose weight, they would have to diet, not just use the advertised 

product. About the same number (45%, 133 of 293 advertisements) indicated that 

the user would have to exercise. About a third of those advertisements, however 

– 32% (43 of 135 advertisements making diet disclosures) and 33% (44 of 133 

advertisements making exercise disclosures) – included this information only in 

small-print disclosures.

3. Testimonials 

Almost half (47%, 137 of 293 advertisements) of the advertisements in the 

2004 survey used testimonials to promote the product.34 These advertisements 

included an average of two testimonials. In 55 advertisements (40% of 137 

advertisements), endorsers claimed to have lost at least 40 pounds, and, in 20 

of those advertisements (15%), the endorsers claimed to have lost at least 80 

pounds. These data suggest that weight-loss advertising continues to rely heavily 

on testimonials and other representations promising extreme weight loss that is 

unlikely to be achieved by any significant number of users. 

F. Magazine Advertising: A Historical Comparison

In the 2001 survey, FTC staff compared weight-loss product advertising that 

appeared in 1992 in the February through May issues of eight national magazines 

(Cosmopolitan, Family Circle, Glamour, Ladies Home Journal, McCall’s/Rosie, 

Redbook, Self, and Woman’s Day) with advertising that appeared in the same 

magazines in 2001. Between 1992 and 2001, the number of weight-loss products 

advertised in these magazines more than doubled, and the number of distinct 
2004 Weight-Loss Advertising Survey

8

advertisements for those products more than tripled.35 Between 1992 and 2001, 

the types of products advertised also shifted, from primarily meal replacements 

such as diet shakes to primarily dietary supplements.36

The comparison between 2004 and 2001 is summarized below in Table 3. In 

the 2004 survey, five out of 34 (15%) distinct advertisements for covered weightloss products made a Red Flag claim in the February through May issues of seven 

of the eight magazines.37 By contrast, in February through May 2001, six out of 

13 (46%) distinct advertisements for similar products made one or more Red Flag 

claims.38

Table 3: Ad Frequency Comparison 

Comparison 2004 2001

# of Distinct Weight-Loss Ads 34 13

# of Distinct Ads Containing Red Flag Claims 5 6

% of Distinct Ads Containing Red Flag Claims 15% 46% 

This comparison shows that the volume of weight-loss advertising in the 

identified magazines has continued to increase – although the volume of Red Flag 

claims has not. Instead, the Red Flag claims’ share has actually fallen, consistent 

with the decline evident in the broader comparison of the two surveys.

III. Conclusion

The results of the 2004 survey examining weight-loss advertising for dietary 

supplements, creams, wraps, devices, and patches in a variety of screened media 

suggests that there has been a substantial reduction in Red Flag claims in the 

last few years. Although we documented this reduction in Red Flag claims 

after the Commission’s 2003 initiative, we do not know if, or to what extent, the 

Commission’s initiative caused the reduction.

It is worth noting again that although the primary comparisons in this 

report are based on comparable sets of advertisements from 2001 and 2004, the 

underlying data were not collected in a way designed to produce results that could 

be generalized to all weight-loss advertising. Caution must therefore be used 

when drawing conclusions from these results. Nonetheless, FTC staff believes 

these results support the Commission’s continuing efforts to encourage the media 

to screen out facially false weight-loss advertisements.
2004 Weight-Loss Advertising Survey

9

Endnotes

1. Timothy J. Muris, Chairman, Federal Trade Commission, “Do the Right Thing” (Apologies to 

Spike Lee), Remarks Before the Cable Television Advertising Bureau (Feb. 11, 2003), available at http://

www.ftc.gov/speeches/muris/030211rightthing.htm. See also Timothy J. Muris, Chairman, Federal Trade 

Commission, Remarks Before the Electronic Retailing Association Spring Conference and Trade Expo (Feb. 

24, 2003); Sheila F. Anthony, Commissioner, Federal Trade Commission, Let’s Clean Up the Diet-Ad Mess, 

ADVERTISING AGE, Feb. 3, 2003 at 18; Thomas B. Leary, Commissioner, Federal Trade Commission, Allies in 

a Common Cause, available at http://www.ftc.gov/speeches/leary/fdli.pdf; Orson Swindle, Commissioner, 

Federal Trade Commission, Combating Deceptive Advertising: The Role of Advertisers, the Media, and the 

FTC, Remarks at the Aggressive Advertising and the Law Conference (Apr. 28, 2003), available at http://

www.ftc.gov/speeches/swindle/030428aggressive.htm.

2. In 2002, the Commission authorized the staff to issue its report, Weight-Loss Advertising: An 

Analysis of Current Trends. THE STAFF OF THE BUREAU OF CONSUMER PROTECTION, U.S. FED. TRADE COMM’N, 

WEIGHT-LOSS ADVERTISING: AN ANALYSIS OF CURRENT TRENDS (2002), available at http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/

reports/weightloss.pdf (hereinafter FTC Weight-Loss Advertising Report). For reasons discussed below, 

the 2001 survey included product types and methods of dissemination that are not included in the 2004 

survey. In some instances, to aid comparison, the FTC staff re-tabulated the 2001 survey data to focus only 

on advertising appearing on television or radio, or in print media, or only on particular types of products 

advertised, e.g., nonprescription drugs, dietary supplements, diet patches, wraps, or creams. These previously 

unpublished results are cited herein as “FTC Staff Analysis of 2001 Survey.”

3. OFFICE OF THE SURGEON GEN., U.S. DEP’T OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERV., THE SURGEON GENERAL’S

CALL TO ACTION TO PREVENT AND DECREASE OVERWEIGHT AND OBESITY xiii (2001), available at http://www.

surgeongeneral.gov/topics/obesity/calltoaction/CalltoAction.pdf.

4. Id. at 10.

5. See, e.g., MARKETDATA ENTER., INC., U.S. WEIGHT LOSS & DIET CONTROL MARKET 6 (2002). 

Marketdata estimated that the total U.S. weight-loss market for 2001 was $37.1 billion and growing at a rate 

of six to seven percent a year. See also Kruger et al., Attempting to lose weight: specific practices among 

U.S. adults, 26 Am. J. of Preventive Med. 402 (2004) (Americans spend over $33 billion annually on weightloss products).

6. FTC Weight-Loss Advertising Report, supra note 2. 

7. Id. at x.

8. FTC Staff Analysis of 2001 Survey. 

9. See Public Workshop: Advertising of Weight-Loss Products, available at http://www.ftc.gov/

os/2002/09/weightlossfrn.htm.

10. 67 Fed. Reg. 59,289 (Sept. 20, 2002).

11. Do the Right Thing, supra note 1. 

12. See Do the Right Thing: A Call for Media Responsibility (with Apologies to Spike Lee), Remarks of 

FTC Chairman Timothy J. Muris, Magazine Publishers of America, Oct. 9, 2003, New York, New York.

13. See supra note 1.

14. THE STAFF OF THE BUREAU OF CONSUMER PROTECTION, U.S. FED. TRADE COMM’N, DECEPTION

IN WEIGHT-LOSS ADVERTISING WORKSHOP: SEIZING OPPORTUNITIES AND BUILDING PARTNERSHIPS TO STOP

WEIGHT-LOSS FRAUD (2003) (hereinafter Workshop Report), available at http://www.ftc.gov/os/2003/12/

031209weightlossrpt.pdf. The Commission voted to authorize the staff to issue this report. 

15. See Public Workshop, supra note 9.

16. U.S. FED. TRADE COMM’N, RED FLAG BOGUS WEIGHT LOSS CLAIMS: A REFERENCE GUIDE FOR MEDIA

ON BOGUS WEIGHT LOSS CLAIM DETECTION (2003), available at http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/pubs/buspubs/

redflag.pdf. 

17. Workshop Report, supra note 14, at 31.

18. The primary objective of this survey was to look at the frequency of facially false Red Flag claims 

in print media and on television and radio following the announcement of the Commission’s Red Flag 
2004 Weight-Loss Advertising Survey

10

initiative. Accordingly, the survey did not address issues such as the extent to which advertisers may have 

only marginally changed the wording of their claim to avoid the specified false claims, e.g., by dropping 

references to specific amounts of weight loss, or the extent to which such advertising may have shifted to 

other media, e.g., the Internet.

19. For more on the survey’s collection methodology, see Appendix A.

20. A free-standing insert (“FSI”) is an advertising supplement inserted into a newspaper, usually the 

Sunday edition, and is characterized by cents-off coupons and mail or telephone order advertising. An entity 

other than the newspaper prepares the FSI.

21. Due to rounding, in some cases, percentages do not add up to 100%.

22. In addition, the 2001 survey included twenty-four advertisements for which the staff could not 

determine the product type. The staff categorized these advertisements as “other.” FTC Weight-Loss 

Advertising Report, supra note 2, at 9. 

23. For the 2001 survey, the FTC staff and the Partnership for Healthy Weight Management collected 

the ads for inclusion in the sample, with the exception of Internet advertisements. (The Partnership for 

Healthy Weight Management is a coalition of representatives from science, academia, the health care 

profession, government, commercial enterprises, and organizations whose mission is to promote sound 

guidance on strategies for achieving and maintaining healthy weight. Additional information concerning the 

Partnership is available at http://www.consumer.gov/weightloss/index.htm.) No effort was made to select 

a scientifically random sample, although, at the same time, there was no concerted effort to collect only 

problematic ads. FTC Weight-Loss Advertising Report, supra note 2, at 3-4. The advertisements in the 2004 

survey were collected by a third-party contractor that monitored advertising running during the selected time 

period.

24. In each instance below where the coded questions, products, and media are not identical, the 

relevant differences are disclosed. Finally, for some comparisons, which are identified in the endnotes by 

citations to FTC Analysis of 2001 Survey, this report relies on previously unpublished analysis of the 2001 

data.

25. This result should not be construed to mean that 85% of the advertisements contained no deceptive 

or misleading claims, only that they did not include one of the Red Flag false claims. The breakdown by 

media was as follows: magazines 12% (15 of 127), newspapers/FSIs 30% (13 of 44), radio 13% (eight of 61), 

tabloids 20% (six of 30), television/infomercials 10% (three of 31). 

26. FTC Staff Analysis of 2001 Survey.

27. FTC Staff Analysis of 2001 Survey. This was the primary claim used to determine whether the 

2001 advertisements contained at least one Red Flag claim. Because of the importance of this claim, the 

48 advertisements containing a Red Flag claim from the 2001 survey were reviewed to determine whether 

they contained a claim of weight-loss exceeding two pounds per week or more for four or more weeks. In 

terms of amount of weight loss, the original coding had been limited to whether the advertisements promised 

substantial weight loss.

We determined that an advertisement communicated this claim if the advertisement both promised 

weight loss of at least two pounds per week (over four or more weeks), and either claimed that users could 

enjoy unlimited amounts of high calorie foods or indicated that users need not reduce caloric intake. 

28. The total number of Red Flag claims is 67 (the sum of the claims in column 1 in Table 2), while 

there are only 45 ads with at least one Red Flag claim. Thus, there are about 1.5 Red Flag claims per 

advertisement for the subset of advertisements with at least one Red Flag claim (67/45).

29. Advertisements making this type of Red Flag claim either referred to specific high-calorie foods 

such as cookies, cakes, and ice cream, promised more generally that users can eat “anything you want” or 

“eat all you want,” or made statements that a user need not show restraint in eating.

30. A related survey question addressed whether the advertisement claimed that the product would 

work – even if consumers had tried other products and gotten no results. Eight percent of the advertisements 

(22 advertisements) communicated that the product works, no matter how many times the user has tried and 

failed to lose weight before. 

31. Because of the way the ads in the 2001 survey were coded, it is not possible to make direct 

comparisons to the 2004 data with respect to claims made for covered weight-loss products appearing in 

screened media. Therefore, the data regarding the 2001 survey provided in this and the following three 
2004 Weight-Loss Advertising Survey

11

endnotes are informative but not directly comparable to the 2004 survey data. In the 2001 survey, 42% of the 

advertisements in the total sample (all weight-loss products in all media) included a claim that the product or 

service was safe. FTC Weight-Loss Advertising Report, supra note 2, at 19. On February 6, 2004, the U.S. 

Food and Drug Administration published a final rule, effective April 12, 2004, prohibiting the sale of dietary 

supplements containing ephedrine alkaloids (ephedra). 21 C.F.R. § 119. It is unclear what effect, if any, this 

rule had on the number of safety claims in the surveyed advertisements.

32. In the 2001 survey, 40% of the advertisements in the total sample communicated that the product 

was clinically proven effective. FTC Weight-Loss Advertising Report, supra note 2, at 17. Of advertisements 

for dietary supplements, wraps, and patches disseminated in all forms of media, 54% made claims that 

the product was clinically proven to work. Id. at 9; FTC Staff Analysis of 2001 Survey. Some of these 

advertisements were disseminated through direct mail or the Internet. Looking at television, radio, and print 

media, 21% of the advertisements made clinically proven claims. Id. These advertisements included some 

products or programs not included in the 2004 survey.

33. In the 2001 sample, 25% of the advertisements in the total sample indicated that the product was 

endorsed by a doctor or other medical professional. FTC Weight-Loss Advertising Report, supra note 2, 

at 17. Twenty-two percent of the advertisements disseminated through television, radio, and print media 

contained this claim. FTC Staff Analysis of 2001 Survey.

34. For comparable products, the 2001 survey found that 58% of the advertisements included 

consumer testimonials. This calculation is based on advertisements disseminated in all media surveyed. 

Looking at advertisements for all types of products surveyed that appeared in the screened media – television, 

radio, or print – 64% of the advertisements used testimonials. Id.

Twenty-nine percent of the advertisements (84 advertisements) in the 2004 survey provided typicality 

disclosures of some kind. These disclosures include statements such as “Results not typical” or “Results are 

extraordinary and may not represent the results of the average person.” 

35. FTC Weight-Loss Advertising Report, supra note 2, at 21. 

36. Id.

37. McCall’s (later named Rosie) was included in the 1992 and 2001 surveys, but because that 

magazine is no longer published, the 2004 survey tracked advertisements appearing in the seven extant 

publications. 

38. In the 2004 survey, 34 distinct advertisements for covered weight-loss products ran a total of 49 

times in the February through May issues of the seven magazines. Five of these advertisements (15%) ran 

seven times (14% of forty-nine) and made a Red Flag claim. By contrast, in February through May 2001, 13 

distinct advertisements for similar products ran 30 times in the same magazine sample. FTC Staff Analysis 

of 2001 Survey. Six distinct advertisements (46%) ran 11 times (36% of thirty) and made one or more Red 

Flag claims. Id.
2004 Weight-Loss Advertising Survey

12
2004 Weight-Loss Advertising Survey

A-1

Appendix A: Collection Methodology

To conduct the study, FTC staff analyzed a sample of 293 advertisements 

collected in February through May 2004 (“collection period”) from broadcast 

and cable television (including infomercials), radio, magazines, newspapers, 

supermarket tabloids, and FSIs. In addition, to evaluate how weight-loss 

advertising has changed over time, the staff compared ads disseminated 

in selected national magazines in 2001 with ads appearing in those same 

publications in 2004.1

A contractor2 monitored six major television networks, more than 40 national 

cable television networks, more than 90 local broadcast television markets, 26 

radio markets, and approximately 635 print media for weight-loss advertisements 

disseminated during the collection period. With the exception of FSIs and certain 

magazines, the contractor monitored its usual television stations, radio stations,3

and print media.4 The Commission provided the contractor with FSIs; the 

contractor collected all other advertisements. For all media, the contractor both 

identified and coded the weight-loss ads.5

 

The contractor collected 1156 ads for all types of weight-loss products and 

services and identified each ad with a number, the name of the product, the name 

of the parent company when identifiable, the date the ad appeared, and the media 

vehicle where it appeared. The contractor excluded 863 ads from the sample on 

two grounds. First, the contractor removed duplicate ads so that the final sample 

contained only distinct ads. Second, the contractor excluded ads for types of 

1. Because this current survey was designed primarily to gauge whether weight-loss advertising 

appearing in print, or on television or radio, has improved since the announcement of the Commission’s 

media screening initiative, its scope differs from the Commission’s 2001 survey in two key ways. First, 

the survey included advertisements only for the types of weight-loss products to which the screening 

guidelines apply: nonprescription weight-loss products such as pills, potions, capsules, or tablets that are not 

prescription drugs; products intended to be rubbed on, wrapped around, or stuck on the body; products that 

purport to stimulate muscles electronically or that jiggle or vibrate; and products intended to be worn such as 

earrings, bracelets, or shoe inserts. Second, this survey reviewed advertising only in media that are capable 

of being screened by a publisher. Therefore, unlike the 2001 survey, this survey did not include unscreened 

advertisements such as unsolicited commercial e-mail (spam), direct mail pieces, or Internet sites.

2. The FTC contracted with VMS Advertising Services (“VMS”) to collect and code survey 

advertisements.

3. The contractor monitors radio stations in 27 of the 90 largest markets and considers the popularity 

of the station as measured by Arbitron and the format of the station (music, talk, news, etc.) so that a mix of 

formats are measured. 

4. The contractor selects the media that it monitors primarily based on market and audience size/

circulation. The contractor monitors approximately the top 90 American media markets, including all of 

the commercial television stations and all of the major daily and weekly newspapers in those markets. The 

contractor chooses consumer magazines primarily based on circulation; a secondary consideration is the types 

of advertising likely to be found in the publication. In addition, the contractor monitored six publications 

specifically chosen by FTC staff: Globe, Let’s Live, National Examiner, Sun, Weekly World News, and 

Women’s Own. 

5. FTC staff trained the coders and supervisor using a coding sheet and instructions. A description of 

the coding process is attached as Appendix B. 
2004 Weight-Loss Advertising Survey

A-2

weight-loss products to which the Red Flag guidelines do not apply.

6

 The final 

sample contained 293 distinct ads. Table 1 provides the breakdown of these ads 

by media.

Table 1: Advertisements by Media

Media Source Number of distinct 

ads in sample

Magazines 127

Tabloids 30

Newspapers/FSIs 44

Television (short-form) 28

Television Infomercials 3

Radio 61

Magazines and Tabloids: The contractor collected weight-loss ads published 

in tabloids and magazines. For monthly magazines, the contractor reviewed the 

February to May 2004 issues. For weeklies and tabloids, the contractor collected 

the first issue published each month. The contractor collected all tabloid ads that 

were at least a quarter page and all magazine ads except classified ads. Of 162 

magazine ads and thirty-eight tabloid ads collected, the contractor identified 127 

distinct magazine ads and thirty distinct tabloid ads for covered products.

Newspapers and FSIs: The contractor collected non-classified weight-loss 

ads from March 25 to May 30, 2004. Initially, the contractor monitored ads 

from fifty newspapers across the country ranging from small town newspapers 

to newspapers from major cities.7 To increase the number of ads collected, 

the contractor expanded the selection on April 16, 2004 to include all of the 

newspapers the contractor normally monitors. FTC staff collected the weekly 

FSIs from the Chicago Tribune, Los Angeles Times, Seattle Post-Intelligencer/

Seattle Times, and the Washington Post. The contractor coded the ads for covered 

products appearing in newspapers that were distinct from ads collected in other 

print media. Of 640 ads collected from newspapers and FSIs, the contractor 

identified forty-four distinct ads for covered products. 

Television and Infomercial: The contractor collected all weight-loss ads 

in the “Diet and Health” category in both broadcast and cable television for 

the monitored stations. For infomercials, the contractor collected all weightloss infomercials initially aired during the monitored period on the monitored 

6. The contractor removed advertisements for prescription drugs, exercise equipment, meal 

replacement products like breakfast shakes or breakfast bars, low-calorie foods or drinks, liposuction or other 

forms of surgery, hypnosis, or special diets such as low-carbohydrate or low-calorie diets. If the nature of 

the advertised product could not be determined from the face of the ad, the ad was excluded from the sample. 

The exclusion of certain types of weight-loss products and services from the survey should not be taken to 

imply that those products are either more or less effective than the covered products. 

7. The contractor selected the original list of 50 newspapers to achieve a mix of geographic 

representation and city size.
2004 Weight-Loss Advertising Survey

A-3

stations. Of 155 television ads and eight infomercials collected in this category, 

the contractor coded 28 distinct television ads and three distinct infomercials for 

covered products. 

Radio: The contractor collected all radio ads in the following categories: 

“meal replacements (diet),” “diet/weight loss centers/clinics and descendants 

(category),” “diet-related aids,” “mail order exercise equipment,” and “weight 

loss aids.” Of these 153 radio ads, the contractor coded 61 distinct radio ads for 

covered products.
2004 Weight-Loss Advertising Survey
2004 Weight-Loss Advertising Survey

B-1

Appendix B: Advertising Coding

The contractor coded 293 distinct ads remaining in the sample following 

the collection process. To simplify the coding process, the coding contractor 

broke down each of the Red Flag claims into component questions. For purposes 

of analysis, the results were recombined to analyze whether a particular ad 

communicated Red Flag claims. For example, to determine whether an ad 

communicated the claim that “consumers who use the advertised product (without 

medical supervision) can safely lose more than three pounds per week for a period 

of more than four weeks,” an ad had to 1) claim that users could lose more than 

three pounds per week for a period of more than four weeks; 2) claim that it was 

safe; and 3) either be silent about the need for medical supervision or claim that 

such supervision was not necessary. 

The coders initially completed a pretest including 20 print ads, one television 

ad, and one radio ad. The pretest results were submitted to Commission staff 

to determine whether the staff should change the coding sheet or instructions to 

clarify issues leading to disagreements between the coders. No changes were 

necessary to the coding sheet. In addition, another instruction was added: coders 

were instructed to mark instances where the advertisement provided material 

information only in a small-print disclosure. If the same information contained 

in the small-print disclosure was also found anywhere in the main body of the 

advertisement, however, the survey would not be so marked. 

With the aid of instructions, two coders independently reviewed each ad 

and completed a coding sheet. Coders first identified central claims in the 

advertisements. Next, the coders noted whether the ads promised that users of 

the product would lose at least three pounds a week for four weeks or more, or at 

least two pounds a week for four weeks or more. If not, the coders determined 

whether the ads promised that users would lose “substantial weight” or “a lot 

of weight.” Coders were given several criteria to guide them in determining 

whether an ad claims “substantial weight loss,” such as whether the ad promises 

at least one pound weight loss per week for more than four weeks. If an ad did 

not reference a particular time period but referenced the number of pounds lost, 

any weight loss greater than 15 pounds was deemed “substantial.” An ad was also 

considered to have claimed substantial weight loss if it promised that users would 

lose more than one clothing size, or more than one inch around a body part such 

as the waist, hips, or thighs.1

Coders answered a series of questions about ad elements – for example, 

whether the ad claimed that the product suppresses appetite or is safe. For 

some questions, coders indicated whether an ad made an affirmative statement 

1. An ad could also imply substantial weight loss by including “before” and “after” pictures where the 

person looks much thinner in the “after” picture than in the “before” picture. As instructed, coders noted only 

express or strongly implied claims. 
2004 Weight-Loss Advertising Survey

B-2

(e.g., users need to reduce their caloric intake to lose weight); made a negative 

statement (e.g., users do not need to reduce their caloric intake to lose weight); or 

made no statement (e.g., the ad does not say whether users need to reduce their 

caloric intake to lose weight). In some cases, the coders recorded information 

from the ad; for example, if the ad included a disclosure such as “Results may 

vary,” the coder wrote down the text of the disclosure.

After each coder finished coding a group of ads, the coders compared 

results and recorded any disagreements. The coders discussed the disagreements 

and, to the extent possible, reconciled the answers. The coders discussed any 

disagreements that could not be reconciled with their supervisor. The contractor 

then forwarded the ads and the collected data to FTC staff who reviewed each ad 

that was coded as containing one or more Red Flag claim. If the staff disagreed 

over the coding of a particular ad, at least two other FTC staff attorneys reviewed 

and discussed the ad. 

As a result of the staff review, six ads were excluded from the sample 

(including four that had been coded as containing Red Flag claims) because 

the weight-loss claims in the advertisements did not necessarily pertain to the 

advertised product. For example, one advertisement featured a medical center 

that offered dietary supplements but also provided diet programs. It was not 

clear whether the weight-loss claims related to the dietary supplement, to the diet 

program, or the two in combination. In 19 other instances, advertisements that 

the coders initially determined made one or more Red Flag claims were re-coded 

by the FTC staff as not making a clear Red Flag claim.2 All but two of these recodes3

 involved the same two Red Flag claims: that the advertised product will 

cause permanent weight loss (even when the user stops using the product), and 

that the advertised product will cause substantial weight loss for all users.4

2. These corrections did not change the general tenor of the results. Including these advertisements 

as originally coded, i.e., as representing a Red Flag claim, 22% (64 of 293) would have included a Red Flag 

claim in 2004.

3. In one case, the FTC reviewers reversed the coders’ initial determination that an advertisement 

communicated that someone using the product would lose substantial weight.

4. For example, for purposes of this survey, a claim that emphasized a product’s mode of operation 

(such as claiming that the product operates by increasing the body’s rate of metabolism so that more calories 

are burned off) was not coded as a claim that the product would work for all users, without additional 

representations.

1-877-FTC-HELP FOR THE CONSUMER

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION ftc.gov