The 6 Dumbest Reasons to Dismiss the Clinical Study Results and Accept hCG as a Valid Treatment for Obesity - Articles and More!

The 6 Dumbest Reasons to Dismiss the Clinical Study Results and Accept hCG as a Valid Treatment for Obesity

If you’re desperate to lose weight and you’ve been surfing the Internet looking for possible solutions, chances are you’ve heard about hCG (or human chorionic gonadotropin) and the Simeons protocol. That’s probably how you ended up here in the first place.

You may have also read about homeopathic hCG drops, which are a total scam (hCG is a prescription drug which needs to be administered via muscular injection). I’d be willing bet you’ve read plenty of glowing testimonials on the effectiveness of hCG, and—like a prophet speaking from the wilderness—the occasional dissenting voice.

Given the bickering, you may be under the impression that the “experts” are divided on the efficacy of hCG and the Simeons protocol.

Except they are not.

As detailed in the full hCG review, the published clinical data is unequivocal; hCG does not outperform a placebo.

Here’s where some of our readers get a little defensive, so let me explain what a placebo means in this case. It is not a sugar pill.

In the case of the Simeons protocol, hCG is administered (via injection) in combination with a Very Low Calorie Diet (VLCD) and regular personal follow ups, which add an element of accountability to the diet. This makes a difference; when people have to answer to another person for their successes or failures, they tend to take their dieting efforts a little more seriously. This is why some commercial weight loss solutions include regular visits to a clinic for weigh ins and so on. Who really wants to appear like a failure in front of another person? (Especially if it’s someone you trust and respect).

A placebo in this case then, means participants are on a VLCD and receive personal follow ups, but do not get any of the actual drug – they’re injected with an inactive (usually saline) solution by clinicians who are “blind” about who is getting the real drug and who isn’t. So when I say “hCG did not outperform a placebo” it certainly does not mean dieters taking hCG didn’t lose weight. It’s a well established fact that VLCDs do work and anyone on one will definitely lose weight. What it means is that those dieters on the VLCD/hCG combo didn’t lose any more weight than those who did not actually receive the drug, but simply combined the VLCD with regular personal follow ups.

Unfortunately, there are no end of absolutely ridiculous, sometimes even completely dumbass arguments made to justify the use of hCG as a treatment protocol. In my experience, these are made either by…

  • People with “skin” in the hCG treatment game. People with ulterior—usually financial—motives. These are friends, clients, employees, fans, spouses and/or colleagues of the hundreds if not thousands of “professionals” who currently prescribe or promote the hCG protocol in their practices. They could even be the practioners themselves. Or they’re affiliates (people who earn a commission on referred customers) of any one of dozens of merchants who sell bogus hCG drops as an alternative to hCG injections.
  • People who have used the hCG protocol and lost weight.” I suppose it’s completely understandable; you invest time, effort and money into the process, so, after experiencing “success”, it’s natural to feel defensive when some guy on some web site has the gall to tell you hCG “doesn’t work.” After all, you lost weight, didn’t you? How can it not work? No one likes being told they’ve been had, and some folks lash out pretty violently.”

So let’s get started with the list shall we? Here are the top 6 dumbest reasons to dismiss the clinical study results and accept hCG as a valid treatment for obesity…

1. I’ve read hundreds of positive testimonials: Yes, and how many of these can you authenticate? How many are truly genuine? How many come from people who have a financial conflict of interest? How many are exaggerated in order to appear more convincing? How many of these come from people who do not know that their results can be entirely attributed to the VLCD and the personal support that accompanies it?

All testimonials are anecdotal. Even when they are 100% genuine, they are not evidence.

Online, you have to assume that they are all “suspect” since you can’t validate any of them. Remember, it’s a relatively simple practice to manufacture testimonials—especially online.

For a couple of hundred dollars I could use a service like MicroWorkers or Amazon MTurk and solicit hundreds of people to post positive testimonials on anything I want. That’s how easy it is to do.

One argument I’ve heard in support of testimonials is this: I’ve read SO many positive testimonials, even if a small percentage them are genuine, hCG still has WAY more advocates than critics.

Not so.

You’re assuming two things; first, that you’ve read all the feedback, and two, that the people who have not experienced success with the hCG protocol are as eager to share their experiences as those who have.

It’s an indisputable fact that people are less interested in broadcasting their failures than their successes. It’s one thing to say, “I’m a success. I used the program and lost weight. This is awesome!” And it’s another to say, “I’m a failure. I couldn’t even make this work. I guess I’m always going to be fat.”

Which do you think is easier? Which do you think people are more likely to broadcast?

I rest my case; the sheer volume of positive feedback is not an accurate representation of hCG effectiveness.

2. The clinical studies are small and old and therefore invalid: If anything old is immediately considered suspect, why is this same logic not being applied to the Simeons protocol itself, which predates the earliest clinical studies by nearly two decades?

Seriously, small and old doesn’t mean wrong. It’s not like today’s advanced technologies are required to implement an effective study regimen or track results. Fact is, the only reason why these studies are being called into question is because they delivered results contrary to those making money from this protocol wanted to see.

3. It’s a pharmaceutical conspiracy: It goes something like this…

The pharmaceutical companies know how effective hCG is, and they hate it. They make more money keeping you sick and fat, and they’ll do the best to suppress the truth from coming out.

This is my favorite of all the dumbassed reasons to accept hCG as a valid treatment protocol, because it asks you to accept the fact that pharmaceutical companies are evil, and then completely turn your brain off and not entertain one iota of skeptical thought. Because if you do any thinking at all, you’ll recognize that this truly is a dumb argument…

i. The pharmaceutical industry is keeping you sick and fat:Really? How is it doing that exactly? Does it have a satellite-based mind control device that forces you into the McDonald’s drive through instead of packing a sensible lunch? Is it responsible for the move to a technology-based employment sector and society that expects you to spend long hours, sedentary, in front of a computer—instead of performing a calorie-expending manual job? Is the pharmaceutical industry forcing you to sit on the couch playing XBOX with a bag of Doritos by your side instead of going to the gym?

The top 3 diseases in the U.S. (heart disease, cancer, and stroke) all have strong, established ties to poor diet and exercise habits. Are these too then, the fault of the pharmaceutical industry? Really?

ii. The pharmaceutical industry is attempting to suppress the truth and curtail the usage of hCG, because it knows how effective it is: Well, they sure are doing a bang up job of it, aren’t they? From what I can see, practioners are free to prescribe and use hCG with impunity. No one seems to be stopping them. No renegade Pfizer or Bayer reps have been caught burning down hCG clinics or trolling weight loss forums posting derogatory comments about hCG. No, the practitioners of the hCG protocol aren’t exactly having a rough “go” of things, as far as I can see.

iii. The pharmaceutical companies are motivated by profit, and since they can’t make money with hCG, they want to prevent its usage: Yes, the pharmaceutical industry is motivated by profit, which is perhaps the best argument so far against the effectiveness of hCG. If hCG really worked as described, and all the negative clinical studies performed on it were as flawed as the hCG supporters maintain, don’t you think the drug companies would conduct their own studies, trumpet the positive results to the FDA, and then market hCG aggressively? You bet they would. The reason why they are NOT doing this is because they cannot market hCG as a weight loss treatment without conclusively demonstrating its effects. Obviously, they don’t think they can. And if the big drug companies don’t think there’s any point in pursuing hCG as a valid treatment of obesity, then that’s one pretty big nail in the hCG coffin.

As an aside, the irony of juxtaposing hCG vs. “Big Pharma” is actually pretty funny when you consider who produces hCG in the first place.

That’s right: Big Pharma. For example, Ovidrel is made by EMD Serono (a division of Merck) and Novarel is manufactured by Ferring Pharmaceuticals. And yes, while HCG is cheap, Big Pharma would really have little to lose by going through the drug approval process. They’re happy to fund studies on even inexpensive, generic drugs if such studies can support their bottom lines… aspirin is a good example of this.

One other point; suppose you take this entire argument at face value (the pharmaceutical industry is trying to suppress the truth, keep you sick and fat, etc). That would pit the pharmaceutical companies against some VERY powerful adversaries who have exactly the opposite goal.


Like the insurance companies who foot the majority of costs for drug plans, hospital stays and treatments.

Or, in countries with socialized medicine, governments. Governments who foot the bill for its citizen’s treatments. It’s inconceivable that powerful insurance companies are going sit idly by and let the pharmaceutical companies drain their coffers.

It’s even less unlikely that cash strapped, deficit laden governments are going to do the same.

4. Dr. Oz recommends it. Yes, but a short time ago, he was against it. What has changed? Has there been new published evidence validating the use or effectiveness of hCG? Nope. None. In exchange for fame and fortune, Dr. Oz has sold himself out to non-scientific, non-evidence based nonsense.

5.  Kevin Trudeau recommends it: In his book, “The Weight Loss Cure “They” Don’t Want You to Know About” Mr. Trudeau advocates the use of hCG for weight loss. Given Mr. Trudeau’s reputation as a charlatan and a con man (he’s been targeted by the FTC in the past) this should hardly be considered a validation of hCG.

I’m sure Mr Trudeau would argue that’s he’s a little guy fighting for the “little guy”. Fighting for the truth, fighting against the government and the pharmaceutical industry who are both trying to tarnish his reputation, shut him up, ruin him financially, most importantly, prevent the truth from coming out (again, I would argue they didn’t do such a good job; after all, his book was published!).

But would a guy so willing to take on big pharma and the government for the greater good of humanity have nearly 400 reported complaints—many regarding unauthorized and fraudulent billings— on sites like RipoffReport and ComplaintsBoard? Despite portraying an altruistic nature, Mr. Trudeau has absolutely no qualms ripping everyday people like you and I off, which is what he has done in the past, and exactly why he’s a con man

I occasionally get e-mails from Mr Trudeau’s defenders, accusing me of being in the employ of the government (note to government: the monthly check is late. Please mail it immediately, or I will tell the world about hCG). I really have nothing to say to these people, since fact-based arguments have little impact on them.

It may be time, however, for them to upgrade their tin foil hats.

6. My doctor, naturopath, chiropractor or trusted health professional recommends it:

Unfortunately, as well-meaning or as trustworthy as they may be, that doesn’t change any of the facts already presented in this article.

And, unless you are a trained scientist or medical professional able to decode scientific jargon and decipher fact from fiction, it’s quite likely their arguments in favor of hCG sound quite sound, reasonable, and well… scientific. Because there are plenty of people administering hCG who can make very “scientific” and credible sounding arguments in favor of it.

But when you put their arguments to a trained scientist, they soon crumble. Case in point; check out this blog post and the ensuing discussion between our scientific and technical adviser Elissa, and Dr. Benjamin Gonzalez, who prescribes hCG at the Atlantis Medical Wellness Center in Maryland.

Like it or not, trained medical and health professionals can be biased, prejudiced, financially motivated, and on occasion, completely wrong.

So there you have it; 6 of the dumbest reasons why you should toss the results of the negative hCG clinical studies into the trash, and whole-heartedly accept the hCG/Simeons protocol as a valid treatment of obesity.

Author: Paul

Paul Crane is the founder of His passions include supplements, working out, motorcycles, guitars... and of course, his German Shepherd dogs.

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *