More on the Q-Link Saga

Clarus Products, makers of the placebo pendant Q-Link have released a media statement emphasising that they do not pay third parties for endorsements.

Here's the release in full


(SAN FRANCISCO, California) –Recent media attention in Australia to energy products
generally and particularly to our own Q-Link™ brand product line calls for our clear
comment. As the developer and manufacturer of the Q-Link™ range of energy products –
products that have been on the market for 19 years and sold to more than a million users in
more than 50 countries – we want to make it clear that neither Clarus nor its exclusive
worldwide distribution partners have ever paid for third-party endorsements by anyone.

For almost two decades, Clarus has built its reputation and our reseller network on
establishing credibility through research and extensive consumer testimonials. Our mission
and our small marketing budgets focus on the use of serious product testing, university
research, and ongoing communication with consumers. We believe efficacious brands are
not built overnight but by our customers' positive experience with our products.

Naturally, Clarus has never changed that focus or strategy; nor do we intend to do so in
favor of paid testimonial advertising or reportage. Recently, we have seen many products
come and go in the consumer “wellness space”that Q-Link™ occupies, and the majority
of those have failed because they have taken short-cuts to gain customers. This is not
Clarus' way. We simply do not pay people for testimonials or endorsements for Q-Link™.

Clarus continues to fund and conduct research into our SRT™ technology at first class
universities, including recently Pennsylvania State University in the United States. Our
commitment is to continue to provide the results of those studies to the media, and to our
consumers via press releases. We welcome and allow our users to provide testimonials and
other reactions on our products through the multitude of web-related and print media
platforms available to them.

For further information please contact Richard Gray, President & CEO (Pacific Standard
Time) on USA 415 378 1986 or Drew Mearns, COO (Eastern Time) on USA 757 810

So what?

There's plenty of wiggle-room for weasels in this "clear comment". For one thing, it speaks only for Clarus, which is the "R&D" company behind the Q-Link range of magic amulets. Distribution is handled through a network of resellers, who Clarus do not own and therefore cannot speak for. Mention is made of this, but Clarus are over-reaching their own authority. Besides, there are many ways that endorsers can be compensated beyond a cheque made out from Clarus Products. Perhaps one of Q-Link's endorsers would like to make a statement at this point? You know, before this gets really humiliating?

Besides, paid endorsement is only an issue between Stephen Fenech and the Telegraph. My interest in the product as a skeptic is in the fact that it plainly doesn't work as described, and is only supported by pseudo-scientific gobbledygook, not "serious product testing", as a cursory read of Q-Link's own claimed "research" demonstrates. I note with interest that the release does not talk about making an efficacious product, only about building an efficacious brand, a completely different proposition.

I do not care if Mario Fenech makes zero dollars or a million a year, and the only way to settle that question for sure would be to audit both Fenech and the Australian distribution arm of Q-Link, and frankly that's a pretty boring proposition

But I do care that Clarus are misleading consumers.

So, Richard Gray, put your product where your mouth is. The Australian Skeptics have already offered you their $100,000 prize if you can demonstrate your product in unequivocal, double-blind, properly controlled tests. The JREF will no doubt allow the same, and their prize pot is much bigger. Come on, get tested. If you win, you take away $1,100,000. If you lose, you shut down Clarus.


posted @ Friday, November 12, 2010 10:53 AM


Comments on this entry:

# re: More on the Q-LInk Saga

Left by Chrys Stevenson at 11/12/2010 11:12 AM
I just don't buy it. Celebrities just don't endorse products for free - even if they like them. A note from Qlink's Australian distributor, Michael Kelly, on Mario Fenech's corporate site suggests strongly that Fenech *was* paid for his testimonial:

"We totally underestimated Mario’s popularity beyond Rugby League. Since Mario has been promoting our range of QLINK products we have seen a measurable increase in sales across all demographics.

Michael Kelly
QLINK Australia"

Now, Kelly is not from Clarus - he's a distributor. So, was Fenech engaged by Kelly?

There's a list of other 'unpaid' promoters of the device on Qlink Australia's website:

Perhaps someone should write to them, pointing out that the product is a scam and noting that, if they haven't been paid to promote the device, they are putting their professional credibility and future saleability as trustworthy product spokespeople at risk?

# re: More on the Q-Link Saga

Left by Andrew Skegg at 11/12/2010 11:31 AM
I am liking your aggressive skepticism.

# re: More on the Q-Link Saga

Left by mattyv at 11/12/2010 11:37 AM
Also note that they say:

"Clarus continues to fund and conduct research into our SRT™ technology at first class universities, including recently Pennsylvania State University in the United States. Our commitment is to continue to provide the results of those studies to the media, and to our consumers via press releases."

Provide results to the media? Press releases? If you're doing studies with universities, why not submit your work for scientific scrutiny via peer-review in reputable journals? Going straight to press hardly demonstrates confidence in the integrity of the research.

Then again, Madman's previous post showed going the scientific route didn't work too well in the case of Q-Link either.
Comments have been closed on this topic.
Vaccination Saves Lives: Stop The Australian Vaccination Network
Say NO to the National School Chaplaincy Program