The incredible team of researchers and developers over at Apidexin have worked their butts off to deliver us the “world’s strongest fat burner”, a product based entirely upon clinically proven, patented (or patent pending) ingredients that work really, really fast.
And hey, it must be good, since Apidexin has even been voted the “#1 Diet Pill 3 Years Straight”, as verified by the 3 official looking but totally unverifiable seals pictured at the top of their sales page.
Here’s something you need to know…
The terms “patented” and “patent-pending” mean absolutely nothing when it comes to proving that a product actually works. That doesn’t prevent retailers from using them to sell their products however; it’s a common misconception that the patenting process involves some sort of critical demonstration or proof of a product’s effectiveness. That’s not the case at all. As Elissa points out in her blog post in the topic…
“A patent is simply a legally-recognized grant of property rights over an invention, formula, or design.”
So don’t be fooled. “Patented” does not mean “works”. You do not need to prove something works to get a patent. It’s a common misconception retailers use to sell their products, but it is not true.
Now what about the clinically proven claim? Believe it or not, it does not mean as much as you think it does. So let’s look at the ingredient profile…
1. Irvingia gabonensis extract: Irvingia gabonensis is African Mango by another name. It’s being touted as the latest and greatest weight loss ingredient ever, thanks to a series of clinical studies that were breathlessly (and uncritically) hyped by Dr. Oz.
Certainly, if you look at the study cited on the Apidexin web site, you would think it’s an amazing ingredient. According to the researchers…
“Irvingia gabonensis extract administered twice a day to healthy, overweight and obese individuals resulted in both weight reduction (body weight, body fat, waist size) and an improvement in metabolic parameters associated with insulin resistance.”
In the study, subjects taking the extract (aka IGOB131) lost an average of 28 pounds over 10 weeks, while consuming over 2700 calories a day!
That’s great news right?
Unfortunately, there are a couple of problems with that rosy picture…
i. I found a patent application for IGOB131 filed by the study’s lead author, Julius Oben. Dr. Oben already holds a patent on another Irvingia gabonensis preparation for weight loss. This represents a conflict of interest.
ii. There are some curious statements in the study that could use elucidating. For instance, it indicates that “no major dietary intervention or formal physical activity program was instituted during the course of the study.” Yet later it reveals that both the placebo and test group consumed foods that broke down to the following: 56% carbohydrate, 29% protein, and 15% fat.
How can it be that 2 groups of people (102 in total) both consumed the exact identical nutrient profile without any major “dietary intervention”? Where are the “error bars?”
And it gets even more mind numbing when it comes to calorie consumption; daily energy consumption for the IGOB131 group was 2767 ± 187 kcal, and for the placebo group, it was 3156 ± 185 kcal.
That’s correct; the folks taking the Irvingia gabonensis extract were also consuming 400 fewer calories per day… yet the discussion of the results makes no mention of this difference. This is inconceivable to me—even if the difference was due to appetite suppression (an effect of IGOB131), it’s entirely relevant to the claimed weight loss effect of the extract.
When it comes to this study, natural bodybuilder and weight loss guru Tom Venuto speaks for me, too:
“To a lay person, a 28-pound weight loss (12.8 kilos) looks incredible. To those familiar with research methods and weight loss, these results look IN-credible, meaning NOT credible. To the informed and discriminating crowd, results like these don’t send you running to the health food store, they raise all sorts of red flags, prompt more questions and demand better-controlled research.”
In short, I’ll be happy to believe these results when I see independent confirmation. This is not to say that I believe Irvingia gabonensis extract doesn’t work at all—lots of traditional medicinal plants contain compounds that are physiologically active. But I believe it’s prudent to remain skeptical about the magnitude of the effect. I’ve been in this business for a long time, and have seen many “miracles” fall flat on closer examination.
At any rate, study participants received 150 mg of Irvingia gabonensis extract twice daily. At the base, two capsules per day dose of Apidexin, you’re 100 mg short of the ideal dosage, if you take the study at face value.
Are you starting to see what “clinically proven” actually means? Good. Let’s move on to the next ingredient…
2. Cissus quadrangularis: This ingredient, also known as “veld grape” was a “hot” fat burning supplement a few years ago, but drifted back into obscurity when it did not deliver on its weight loss promises.
Looks like the intrepid researchers and developers over at Apidexin didn’t get the memo, or they were too busy playing World of Warcraft (when they were supposed working) and missed it.
Either way, here’s the bottom line on Cissus…
Once again, there is some clinical data validating this ingredient’s effects on weight loss, and once again, the only studies that exist (Lipids Health Dis. 2007 Feb 4;6:4 and Lipids Health Dis. 2006 Sep 2;5:24) just happen to have been conducted by someone with a financial conflict of interest.
Yes, the lead author on this study, Julius Oben (who incidentally is the lead author on the African mango studies as well) has a patent on Cissus quadrangularis for weight loss.
And in case you were wondering, there is no independent, corroborating data for this ingredient either.
In addition, bodybuilders who have long taken Cissus for its anti-osteoporotic activity have never reported weight loss as a side effect of supplementation.
3. Alchemilla vulgaris, Olea europaea, Cuminum cyminum and Mentha longifolia: This quartet of ingredients was originally introduced in a product called WeighLevel, but also appear in Bob Harper’s Smart Weight Loss product and some of the Hydroxycut Pro Series offerings.
Once again, there is clinical data (conducted on the WeighLevel formula) that confirms some effect on weight loss, and once again, we have a serious conflict of interest; if you check the study, you’ll see that one co-author, Eli Kassis, is directly affiliated with Sprunk-Jansen (the manufacturer of WeighLevel).
And it gets worse; Sprunk-Jansen is a partner of the Antaki Center For Herbal Medicine and has “exclusive rights” to world-wide distribution of the products the Center develops. And—wouldn’t you just know it—4 other co-authors are directly affiliated with the Antaki Center for Herbal Medicine.
It’s hardly “independent research” when 5 of the 6 study authors have a vested interest in a positive study result.
Additionally, I have never even heard of “The Open Complementary Medicine Journal”. If nothing else, it’s certainly not a well known, often referenced journal.
4. Caffeine: A standard ingredient in just about every weight loss supplement on the planet. And while caffeine’s fat burning characteristics are well established (see Am J Clin Nutr. 1989 Jan;49(1):44-50, Am J Clin Nutr. 1980 May;33(5):989-97), its effects are generally quite mild and tend to be exaggerated by most retailers.
Still, most consumers like the additional energy caffeine provides, even if it is an ordinary and cheap addition to any fat burner supplement.
I’m sure it’s becoming apparent by now; Apidexin’s “clinically proven” claim needs to be taken with a grain… er… chunk of salt.
As you can see, the term clinically proven does not necessarily mean much, especially when you start looking at the supporting studies closely. Accordingly, there’s really not much point in experimenting with this formula as it stands. Here’s what we recommend if you like the look of this formula…
- The original WeighLevel formula (upon which the positive study we referenced earlier was conducted) can be purchased online for about $35.
- Forget African mango; taken at the proper dosage, it is much too expansive. Try glucomannan instead as your fiber supplement. A month’s worth can be had for $10.
- Caffeine is cheap; you can buy a month’s worth for less than $4.
- Everything we’ve seen and read suggests Cissus is a bust for weight loss; don’t even worry about this one.
Of course, we’re not suggesting this is the route you should take, nor that this will bring extraordinary results. However, you will be getting the correct doses of the most important ingredients for a few less dollars. And who doesn’t want to keep more money in his or her pockets?