What FTC actions and court cases have targeted fake brain‑booster supplement marketing since 2015?
Executive summary
Since 2015 the Federal Trade Commission has repeatedly targeted sellers of so‑called “brain‑booster” supplements through complaints, settlements and court actions that expose fake news sites, fabricated endorsements, hijacked reviews and phony expert spokespeople—most prominently the Geniux matter and a radio‑infomercial scheme—and the agency’s work sits inside a much larger, long‑running campaign against deceptive brain‑health claims [1] [2] [3] [4].
1. Major named enforcement actions: Geniux and multi‑million dollar settlements
One of the FTC’s headline cases since 2015 involved the marketers of Geniux and related products, a 2019 enforcement action that led to a reported settlement addressing claims that the supplements boosted memory, concentration and IQ by implausible percentages and used fake news webpages and celebrity endorsements; the FTC alleged the defendants made claims such as “increase focus by as much as 300%” and that their ads falsely invoked scientific validation [1] [5].
2. Radio‑infomercial and fake‑expert sting: FlexiPrin / CogniPrin and Better Health Nutritionals
The FTC joined a Maine attorney‑general action against Better Health Nutritionals for marketing FlexiPrin and CogniPrin through 30‑minute radio spots designed to sound like news or talk shows, employing a pseudonymous “brain scientist” and raking in more than $6 million in sales per the FTC complaint; the agency described the marketing as a “wide range of practices” that caused significant financial injury to consumers [2] [3].
3. The playbook uncovered by enforcement: fake news sites, bogus endorsements, and review fraud
Across multiple cases the FTC has cataloged recurring deception tactics: fake news articles that mimic trusted outlets, false attributions to scientists and celebrities, bogus clinical claims, and manipulation of online reviews and listings—tactics the agency confronted in the Geniux action, in the BrainStorm Elite‑style scams reported by Forbes, and in cases involving hijacked Amazon reviews where the FTC ordered monetary relief and marketing bans [1] [6] [7].
4. Scale and institutional posture: years of brain‑claim enforcement and guidance
The Geniux and radio‑infomercial matters fit a broader trend: watchdog tracking shows the FTC has brought nearly 70 actions over deceptive brain claims since 1995 and the agency itself has said it has settled or adjudicated more than 200 false‑advertising cases involving dietary supplements and health products since 1998, signaling sustained focus rather than one‑off interventions [4] [8]. The agency has also issued consumer alerts—such as a 2017 warning about fake “brain booster” ads that mimic news sites—to raise public awareness [9].
5. Remedies, bans and cross‑agency context
The FTC pursues injunctive relief, monetary redress and marketing prohibitions; the agency’s recent statements and press releases point to court wins and settlements that include refunds, lifetime bans in extreme cases, and orders against deceptive review practices, and the FTC has coordinated with state attorneys general and highlighted overlaps with FDA responsibilities for supplements [10] [8] [2].
6. Critics, limits and enforcement gaps
Coverage and reporting show limits: some high‑profile internet marketing scams (for example, the BrainStorm Elite fake‑Forbes campaign) drew media attention but did not always result in FTC prosecution, illustrating resource and jurisdictional constraints the agency faces when confronting dozens of bad actors and novel online tactics [6]. Consumer groups and trackers note a steady stream of actions but also that millions continue to be spent by consumers on products of dubious efficacy, suggesting enforcement deters some schemes but does not eliminate the market [4].
7. Bottom line: enforcement is active but ongoing
Since 2015 the FTC has used its traditional tools—complaints, settlements, consumer alerts and coordination with states—to take down or limit major fake brain‑booster schemes (Geniux, the Better Health Nutritionals radio scheme, review‑manipulation cases) while documenting a pattern of deceptive tactics and urging better industry substantiation and consumer vigilance [1] [2] [7] [9].