liar, liar ? pants on fire ?
January 2, 2012 4:07 PM Subscribe
"Far infrared therapy" products -- bona fide or bogus?
I keep seeing ads for various wearables* that claim to keep you warmer, or treat various medical conditions, with fabrics that use "far infrared therapy." My BS alarm is going off, but I'm always on the watch for anything that might help me keep my hands and feet warm, and help moderate the temperature swings that come with my wonky body thermostat. The fabrics apparently incorporate something called "bio-ceramics," which seems like an oxymoron.
I know that "infrared" is just a fancy way of saying "radiant heat," and I understand that radiant heat can give you a more comfortable feeling of warmth than conductive or convective heat. My thinking is that wearing these things couldn't actually make you warmer, since there's no heat source -- they would just be absorbing and re-radiating heat that my body gives off (which, in the case of my hands or feet during a Raynaud's episode, is very, very little, since the blood vessels are clamped shut). And wouldn't they also be deflecting radiant heat that I might otherwise be absorbing from the environment, potentially making me colder?
Is the far-ness of the infrared relevant here? How would far- infrared be better than near- or medium- infrared?
Some of the websites for these products also have the aroma of multi-level marketing, which underlines my skepticism.
These websites seem to drift pretty far into making health claims, explicitly calling the products "arthritis treatment devices"--isn't that legally dubious? Don't medical devices require FDA approval?
Does anyone have any experience with these things? Could they work? Is there any real science behind all the marketing mumbo-jumbo?
-------------
*Passive Infrared Therapy T-shirt
Gloves, socks, etc.
and for a good laugh, briefs, too -
and there's this to wrap up your horse's legs.
I keep seeing ads for various wearables* that claim to keep you warmer, or treat various medical conditions, with fabrics that use "far infrared therapy." My BS alarm is going off, but I'm always on the watch for anything that might help me keep my hands and feet warm, and help moderate the temperature swings that come with my wonky body thermostat. The fabrics apparently incorporate something called "bio-ceramics," which seems like an oxymoron.
I know that "infrared" is just a fancy way of saying "radiant heat," and I understand that radiant heat can give you a more comfortable feeling of warmth than conductive or convective heat. My thinking is that wearing these things couldn't actually make you warmer, since there's no heat source -- they would just be absorbing and re-radiating heat that my body gives off (which, in the case of my hands or feet during a Raynaud's episode, is very, very little, since the blood vessels are clamped shut). And wouldn't they also be deflecting radiant heat that I might otherwise be absorbing from the environment, potentially making me colder?
Is the far-ness of the infrared relevant here? How would far- infrared be better than near- or medium- infrared?
Some of the websites for these products also have the aroma of multi-level marketing, which underlines my skepticism.
These websites seem to drift pretty far into making health claims, explicitly calling the products "arthritis treatment devices"--isn't that legally dubious? Don't medical devices require FDA approval?
Does anyone have any experience with these things? Could they work? Is there any real science behind all the marketing mumbo-jumbo?
-------------
*Passive Infrared Therapy T-shirt
Gloves, socks, etc.
and for a good laugh, briefs, too -
and there's this to wrap up your horse's legs.
Meh.
Here's a quick control - put on thin cotton gloves, then wrap foil around one hand and wax paper around the other hand. The foil will perform the same radiant heat reflection/blocking that they're advertising here. I doubt you'll see a difference between the foil and paper.
If you really want to keep your hands/feet/body warm then get some electrically-heated outerwear to actually heat your body (or simply use heat packets).
posted by jpeacock at 4:29 PM on January 2, 2012
Here's a quick control - put on thin cotton gloves, then wrap foil around one hand and wax paper around the other hand. The foil will perform the same radiant heat reflection/blocking that they're advertising here. I doubt you'll see a difference between the foil and paper.
If you really want to keep your hands/feet/body warm then get some electrically-heated outerwear to actually heat your body (or simply use heat packets).
posted by jpeacock at 4:29 PM on January 2, 2012
The shirt you link to is basically a polyester shirt with ceramic particles embedded in the fabric. It makes sense that ceramic is better at retaining and radiating heat than regular shirt fabric, but I'm dubious that it would make any difference at that level.
posted by mkultra at 5:18 PM on January 2, 2012
posted by mkultra at 5:18 PM on January 2, 2012
I was once shopping for a water filter. I found one that did what I wanted, but it also had bullshit marketing claims, up to and including invoked the healing powers of quatz crystals.
I decided that I'm not rewarding deceit, and even though the product would do what I wanted, I bought from a competitor that limited themselves to honest claims.
So my suggestion is that this kind of dishonest marketing removes any need to evaluate the product - it doesn't matter if the product is any good, you still shouldn't support deceit.
posted by -harlequin- at 5:25 PM on January 2, 2012 [2 favorites]
I decided that I'm not rewarding deceit, and even though the product would do what I wanted, I bought from a competitor that limited themselves to honest claims.
So my suggestion is that this kind of dishonest marketing removes any need to evaluate the product - it doesn't matter if the product is any good, you still shouldn't support deceit.
posted by -harlequin- at 5:25 PM on January 2, 2012 [2 favorites]
This explanation of the therapy is such unadulterated bullshit it's not even wrong.
posted by TedW at 5:27 PM on January 2, 2012 [2 favorites]
posted by TedW at 5:27 PM on January 2, 2012 [2 favorites]
(And At a pragmatic level, bullshit-marketing works best on indiscriminate and/or gullible people. And if a product is explicitly targeted at indiscriminate/gullible buyers, you can generally expect the quality to be shoddy, and thus know that you don't want it. No-one puts blood, sweat, and tears into developing a top product that distinguishes itself in quality yet targets the indiscriminate buyer market, except for a few True Believers, but their products also suck.)
posted by -harlequin- at 5:36 PM on January 2, 2012
posted by -harlequin- at 5:36 PM on January 2, 2012
Response by poster: So it seems my BS alarm was not misleading me - TedW, I hadn't looked deeply enough to find that particular page - wow. Pretty unmistakeable. I guess I was hoping that there was at least bit of possible validity to it, just to save me from believing that there are still so many slimy snake oil sellers out there.
Can anyone shed light on the legal angle?
posted by Corvid at 6:22 PM on January 2, 2012
Can anyone shed light on the legal angle?
posted by Corvid at 6:22 PM on January 2, 2012
Can anyone shed light on the legal angle?
Unfortunately the FDA is so underfunded and understaffed that it only pursues the most egregious offenders when it comes to quack medical devices; in general if it is not obviously unsafe and not too blatant about the claims it makes they will tend to ignore a product. For example, look at the story of Enzyte (of Smilin' Bob fame) which evidently continues to be made by a new company (that I won't do the favor of linking to) even after the owners of the original company were sent to jail for fraud. It probably helps that these frauds have two allies in the senate; one conservative and one liberal.
posted by TedW at 9:11 AM on January 3, 2012
Unfortunately the FDA is so underfunded and understaffed that it only pursues the most egregious offenders when it comes to quack medical devices; in general if it is not obviously unsafe and not too blatant about the claims it makes they will tend to ignore a product. For example, look at the story of Enzyte (of Smilin' Bob fame) which evidently continues to be made by a new company (that I won't do the favor of linking to) even after the owners of the original company were sent to jail for fraud. It probably helps that these frauds have two allies in the senate; one conservative and one liberal.
posted by TedW at 9:11 AM on January 3, 2012
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by mhoye at 4:12 PM on January 2, 2012