In an unimaginable and devastating blow to millions of men hoping to pharmacologically enhance certain reproductive organs, a Daily Medical Examiner SPECIAL INVESTIGATION into on-line advertisements for male enhancement found that the science behind many product claims was somewhat weak. In a rigorously designed “mass-sample ingestion study” the DME’s Urologic Research Corps (aka Summer Interns #2 and 9) tried over 600 such products and found that the only effect notable from most of these medications was disillusionment. When contacted, many “scientists” affiliated with product development did not actually have degrees, or labs, or consciences.
Public reaction to the study has been violent.
“I was shocked to learn that the product I ordered from the advertisement side-bar of a trusted software piracy site had never been clinically tested or approved. I feel that an inviolable trust has just been violated,” said Howard Rergs, who has been using the non-prescription drug VitaGrande, produced in Hong Kong, for several months with disappointing results. “How can I ever learn to trust again?!”
Bruce Cliggens didn’t need a study to tell him that his trust was misplaced. He becomes teary eyed as he speaks of the way he spent most of last semester’s federal student loan money on a product called Extendia which left him feeling bloated and alone.
“They said ‘guaranteed results’ and offered an international number that I could call if I was not 100% satisfied. When I called the number, it was just some restaurant in Sri Lanka, and they were not interested in my lackluster medication results. They offered me a discount on mutton rolls, but I don’t want a mutton roll…I want my money back.”
While Bruce and Howard, along with many others, try to duct tape together the shards of their broken dreams, the DME and its tireless research team will continue to bring you the truth, unseasoned and undercooked – even when it hurts.
DISCLAIMER: All stories, quotations, medical reports, studies, and news entries are fictitious and fabricated for the purpose of satire. Any relationship to actual events present or historical should be considered coincidental. The DME uses invented names for people, businesses, and institutions in its stories, except in cases where public figures are being satirized. Any other use of real names is coincidental.