Reebok EasyTone Advertising

Region

United States; Japan

Associated With

Reebok International Ltd. - advertiser

Defining Feature

28%–11%–11% muscle-toning claims

Status

Historical event - 2011 stipulated FTC order

Overview

Reebok EasyTone adverts promised that an ordinary walk could tone three muscle groups more effectively.

Reebok Japan said EasyTone launched worldwide in February 2009. adidas Group placed it in an emerging toning-shoe market. A filed advert paired the shoes with 28%, 11% and 11% claims for the glutes, hamstrings and calves.

In 2011, a stipulated FTC order required consumer-redress funding and instructed retailers to remove or cover 28–11–11 promotions; future quantified claims needed specified support.

Why It Mattered

Advertising turned specialised muscle measurements into a familiar everyday promise: walking in a particular shoe could do extra work. Reebok's small treadmill comparison supplied the figures, but NAD found it insufficient for the quantified and general toning claims. The episode shows why a neat percentage can make a narrow test sound like a broader consumer benefit.

The Filed Advertisement

• FTC Exhibit 3 shows EasyTone footwear beside a walking figure and the claims “28% gluteus maximus”, “11% hamstrings” and “11% calves”.
• The FTC complaint linked those figures to advertising that described the shoes’ moving-air “micro-instability”.

The Test Behind the Percentages

• In the NAD proceeding, Reebok described averages from EMG readings taken while five participants walked for five minutes in EasyTone and comparison shoes on a treadmill.
• Reebok described the University of Delaware study as unpublished.
• NAD concluded that this testing did not support the quantified or general strengthening and toning claims, and recommended discontinuance.

The 2011 FTC Order

• The stipulated final judgment and order was filed on 29 September 2011 in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio.
• The $25 million fund was designated for consumer refunds, not a general fine.
• The order instructed specified retailers to remove promotional material containing the 28–11–11 claims or cover those claims on boxes, and set substantiation conditions for future quantified representations.

Gallery