|
RE: Minnesota Hunters Sue Scent Lok
ORIGINAL: archer58 ORIGINAL: Dr Andy It seems to work for me, however,I don't get sucked into all the hype either. I wouldn't dream of just throwing on some scent-lok and hunting. I still shower to reduce odor and I pay attention to the wind as well. I feel that it helps to a degree and I'll continue to use it. Quote from the news article: "The suit doesn't cite any independent testing done on the clothing that shows it doesn't work." Maybe we'll get some!!! |
RE: Minnesota Hunters Sue Scent Lok
ORIGINAL: atlasman ORIGINAL: gamespooker If they are lieing why shouldn't they get sued? You don't believe fraud (if proven) should be punished? |
RE: Minnesota Hunters Sue Scent Lok
I know scent lok is a joke because I know enough about activated carbon to understand that at least some of their advertising is a bald face lie. That being that it can be reactivated in a household clothes dryer. That is a lie. It can not. If scent lok has ever consulted a single scientist they should know this as well. Hell, I learned enough about the stuff while getting a degree in water chemistry to smell this claim out as BS. And you're going to tell me that the people who are in the activated carbon clothing industry don't know they are lying to people. But it's actually more of a scam than even I first realized. I saw a reporter cut one of these suits open (something scent lok knows the average consumer would never do to such an expensive suit) and the actual amount of activated carbon inside it was shockingly scant. Even if the stuff came home from the store completely unsaturated (it doesn't) and working just as efficiently as scent lok claims (it won't) the pathetic joke of a scant sprinkling ofcarbon inside these suits wouldn't suck up 3 gnat farts. It's a scam folks. A huge, big, honking,scam, complete with paid to lie celebritieshelping topull it off. All this being the case I have no problems with a company that makes fraudulent claims being sued. But with the money scent lok has vs just a group of hunters, I doubt seriously that much will come of it.
|
RE: Minnesota Hunters Sue Scent Lok
Here we go again. The only winners in this case will be the stinking lawyers. Let's face it, we live in a sue-happy society that wants something for nothing. Do your home work and research the product, if it doesn't work, DON'T BUY IT! The market will take care of those companies.
|
RE: Minnesota Hunters Sue Scent Lok
ORIGINAL: Todd1700 But with the money scent lok has vs just a group of hunters, I doubt seriously that much will come of it. |
RE: Minnesota Hunters Sue Scent Lok
Suing a company for having been defrauded is certainly not a new or novel idea. If they did in fact knowingly promote and sell a defective product then they open themselves up to liability and should be sued. If their product truly works as advertised then they have nothing to worry about, do they?
|
RE: Minnesota Hunters Sue Scent Lok
This TR guy has a grudge against SL. He is the same guy that tried to have SL bribehim to keep quiet. When they did not do so he played the "I was just trying to show what type company they are"card  TR is a joke, he is not sueing for hunters. He is suing for himself and his personel Grudge. Please MR. TR keep this hunter out of it. I think there are more important things to worry about. T.R. IS NOT INVOLVED IN THE SUIT. If you'd bothered to read the entire thing, it plainly says right there, in black and white, that he has used the stuff but never purchased any. That prevents him from being a party to this class action suit right there because he has not suffered damages. duh! If I were a reporter he would be the most obvious third party I'd ask for a quote because of his reputation on this topic. A sharp reporter asked and he gave a quote and that's the extent of it. (I bet he's going to be asked to present testimony though.) |
RE: Minnesota Hunters Sue Scent Lok
Should I sue Bowflex Home Gym? Three days a week for 20mins and I still don't look anything like the guy in the commecial. Maybe Axe deodorant, I've used the stuff and the women don't swarm to me like flies to ****. I should sue them! How many other ads are there that overstate and exxagerate claims
|
RE: Minnesota Hunters Sue Scent Lok
ORIGINAL: Arthur P This TR guy has a grudge against SL. He is the same guy that tried to have SL bribehim to keep quiet. When they did not do so he played the "I was just trying to show what type company they are"card[:'(] TR is a joke, he is not sueing for hunters. He is suing for himself and his personel Grudge. Please MR. TR keep this hunter out of it. I think there are more important things to worry about. T.R. IS NOT INVOLVED IN THE SUIT. If you'd bothered to read the entire thing, it plainly says right there, in black and white, that he has used the stuff but never purchased any. That prevents him from being a party to this class action suit right there because he has not suffered damages. duh! If I were a reporter he would be the most obvious third party I'd ask for a quote because of his reputation on this topic. A sharp reporter asked and he gave a quote and that's the extent of it. (I bet he's going to be asked to present testimony though.) |
RE: Minnesota Hunters Sue Scent Lok
Oh... You knew that and still said it's TR that's suing. Hmmm. Seems you have more issues with TR than he has with SL.[8D]
|
RE: Minnesota Hunters Sue Scent Lok
Maybe TR is just trying to look out for the people who will listen to him. That's what I believe anyway. He has certainly given me some good advice in the past.
|
RE: Minnesota Hunters Sue Scent Lok
ORIGINAL: Arthur P Germ.... You and nodog need to go back and reread that excerpt, all the way through this time. If you just jump to conclusions the instant you hit TR's name and quit reading, then you miss it. T.R. IS NOT INVOLVED IN THE SUIT. If you'd bothered to read the entire thing, it plainly says right there, in black and white, that he has used the stuff but never purchased any. That prevents him from being a party to this class action suit right there because he has not suffered damages. duh! And a Minnesotan -- T.R. Michels, 57, of Burnsville, an outdoor writer, author, hunting guide and frequent hunting seminar speaker who has his own website (www.trmichels.com) -- acknowledges he is responsible for raising much of the stink. "Hunters have been screwed," he said. "They have been misled. And they [companies] are making tons of money off the stuff." He said he has no ax to grind and began looking at the clothing because his job as a writer and outdoor expert is to "look into myths and dispell them." Said Michels: "I was lied to, and that really ticked me off." He is not involved in the lawsuit, and won't be because, while he has used Scent-Lok clothing, he's never purchased it, he said. However, Michels has questioned the performance of the clothing with the U.S. Patent Office and has posted numerous exchanges he's had with the company on his website and others. |
RE: Minnesota Hunters Sue Scent Lok
He also had a bad busniess deal with SL(I think) which has caused the riff.
TR is not thinking of sportsman;) |
RE: Minnesota Hunters Sue Scent Lok
Is it really SO important that some of us have to cram down the rest's throats that they've been "duped"?
Really? |
RE: Minnesota Hunters Sue Scent Lok
That's a big part of it for them GMMAT - the attention. I have no doubt Scent Lok or any other carbon activated clothing can help. But its not the end all. You can strap on your Scent Lok suit and sit in a stand 10 feet off the ground moving around constantly and farting and belching out your egg mcmuffin and expect to see big bucks. Scent Lok, like rubber boots or good camo or a quality treestand is one piece of the puzzle. Now to what degree scent proof clothing works is debatable and so is the fact that "false claims" were made by Scent Lok or any other company. Again, you could say the same for scent companies or call makers or decoy makers etc. They all claim to aid you in your hunting experience as well but they don't always. And a lot of it has to do with how they are all used.
|
RE: Minnesota Hunters Sue Scent Lok
I use the stuff and I think it works. It really doesn't cost any more then another brand of hunting clothes so what's the big deal? It's still great clothing and it has a carbon liner that may or may not help you depending on how you take care of the clothing. How can the people suing prove that they took the precautions Scent Lok claims you must do for it to be effective. There isn't a product out there that will cover all human scent fromthe nose of a whitetail deer. If anybody thinks that they haven't spent enough time in the woods to know any better. I use the product but it isn't for everyone. If you don't believe it works don't buy it! It's really that simple.
Darrall |
RE: Minnesota Hunters Sue Scent Lok
I'd seriously like to see the claim the companies are making (exact claim).....and then see if "damages" could be attributed to the claim being "false".
"Forget the wind....just hunt".........well....what if I do that? What "damages" have I truly incurred if I do that? Let's say the garment has a 1% effective rate of odor captivation capabilities. Has it helped, "some"? What "damages" have I incurred if I practice an otherwise sound scent-control regimen.....and a deer busts me? Does the fact that I ate a garlic sandwich on stand come into play? Can you prove that it did/didn't? Can you prove I did/didn't? This is ludicrous in "my" eyes. I think every person that purchases these garments is taking a chance.....JUST like the guys who purchase the buck growl are taking a chance. it seems that, for the most part, the guys who own these garments are satisfied with their purchases (heck...it's good camo, if nothing else). The ones I see raising the MOST stink don't own it.....don't care to own it.....and the biggest factor to that (that I see cited) is $$. It's entertaining to watch these events unfold. I own some of it.....and the outcome of these conversations AND this "lawsuit" aren't going to sway me in any way. It's good camo, period. "IF" it has scent control capabilities......that is a "bonus". I took the chance. I sleep fine. |
RE: Minnesota Hunters Sue Scent Lok
I think most of it has to do with the Carbon and the Reactivation of it.
|
RE: Minnesota Hunters Sue Scent Lok
GMMAT,
In my opinion, people in general don’t try to cram it down people’s throats that they’ve been duped. It is more of a situation where those that may have been duped don’t seem to want to admit it, and take the words of others to be negative, instead of positive, constructive or helpful. Because admitting that you could have been wrong, could mean that you fall for silly marketing schemes, or can’t get over the testimonials…. Perhaps the people doing the cramming are trying to help. They do sell carbon in a spray bottle. I think it is like $5 - $8. Rinse the old off and spray on the new, but that is if you think the stuff works. And if you do think that it works, are you okay with the reactivation process of the clothing… I read up on it, and I think carbon may have some benefit, but look at the price tag. I’m not at all surprised that there is a suit coming and I won’t be surprise if it becomes class action. KP |
RE: Minnesota Hunters Sue Scent Lok
I'm glad they are being sued because it is advertising to the masses that they are lying.
With that said they won't win. The case will be tried above the district court level and the burden of proof will fall on the plaintiff. Neither side can prove it does/doesn't work. So the judge will likely dismiss the case or worse yet for the plaintiff, make no decision at all. Tom |
RE: Minnesota Hunters Sue Scent Lok
So to prove the suit......they're going to HAVE to prove that reactivation (At ANY level) is NOT achievable. If they do that.....I'll jump ship.
Something tells me they're not going to be able to prove this. They'll parade "their" guy. The Plaintiff will parade "his" guy. Nothing past what's already been done. There will NOT be an UNbiased report. I honestly don't think there's a party involved who is UNbiased. |
RE: Minnesota Hunters Sue Scent Lok
I shoot a Bowtech, there is still some arch in archery..They claim they take it out!
I've hit Top Flites, They weren't the Longest Ball...They claim they are! I've hit a rock with my Chevy..I dented my truck...It's not "hard as a rock"..They claim it is! Where will it end?? Sign me up Scent-lok..I'll parade hundreds of guys through the courts claiming it worked as advertised! If you didn't get "duped" good for you..but you don't see many people who bought it..claiming fraud. It's always the other guys! |
RE: Minnesota Hunters Sue Scent Lok
ORIGINAL: BobCo19-65 I think most of it has to do with the Carbon and the Reactivation of it. |
RE: Minnesota Hunters Sue Scent Lok
they dont claim there hard as rock they just state "like a rock" and they dont even state what or which part is like a rock.;)
|
RE: Minnesota Hunters Sue Scent Lok
It is going to be one expensive expert's word against another expensive expert's word and the winner is going to be the one with the most believable expert. How are the plaintiffs going to prove in court that it was the failure of their $1,000.00 scent-lok suit that cost them a deer? What about the smells coming from their equipment, a bag they took to the stand, leather shoe smell, hair gel/hairspray, deodorant, cologne, sound of a phone, a cough or sneeze, sun glinting off of a piece of equipment or jewelry, . . . the list of possiblities goes on and on.
That being said, if it works for you, woo hoo. If you don't think it works, don't buy it. Research everything you buy before you invest your hard earned money. I think we all realize that nothing is 100% foolproof. The companies keep making better products but the fools keep getting better!!! |
RE: Minnesota Hunters Sue Scent Lok
That is a major role of the FDA.........to insure products do what they claim to. That is why herbals and supplements are not allowed by law to make health claims.........because it is not proven in scientific controlled studies. The FDA has one interest. To protect the drug companies and their profits. The FDA is THE most corrupt entity in the USA. How many drugs have been taken off the market well AFTER they kill many many people? Why? Because the drug companies lose billions in profits if their patented drug isn't selling. The FDA doesn't care about us they care about the drug companies. How many drugs including Tylenol cure the cause of a problem? NONE. They all treat a symptom. Therefore we become dependant on these drugs that do nothing but make our body think it feels better. Then we develop other problems and need more drugs. The FDA and drug companies WIN. Natural cures cannot be patented. Therefore there is little money to be made with natural cures. The drug companies (and FDA) know this and will squash every single company that tries to develop a natural cure. The drug companies need their patented drugs to make their billions. It is law that only drugs and surgery can cure disease. If you promote a natural cure to prevent or cure disease you will be arrested and sent to jail. This is your FDA. It is my OPINION that the FDA is responsible for cancer in the US. Cancer in my opinion has been cured. What happens to the American Cancer Society if cancer is cured? Thousands lose their high paying jobs. The FDA has to findout how to keep cancer alive so they can sell more drugs. If you don't believe cancer has been cured at least many forms start looking around at other countries that don't have multi billion dollar drug companies. You might be surprised. Don't even get me started on this crap. If Scentlok wants to market a product to give hunters confidence that's fine with me. I think it works to a point. If the FDA wants to continue to allow thousands of americans to be killed by drugs which should have never been put on the market. There's where I havea problem. |
RE: Minnesota Hunters Sue Scent Lok
I feel as though I’m unbiased to carbon, but not the clothing lines. You asked about “damages”; If I sold you a car that didn’t run – what are the damages? Were you unable to get to work? There are many ways to get there…
Keep in mind it is the party that makes the claims that have to show the proof. The clothing company’s are the ones making the claims, some of the customers aren’t seeing the results that they expected. Does this surprise me? Nope, it’s called marketing. They have an entirely different language that they use, which is really similar to the language that we use, but with a funny twist; you know, like using the same words that we use, but they have different meanings… It really is trickery at its finest hour. The real issue is; did they know that it didn’t work, the way that they said it does. I’m really not sure, and I’m pretty sure others aren’t either. And your statement on reactivation is probably true, but here we go again with BS. How about it doesn’t make good sense, does that work? NO, it doesn’t work. If they were to mention that you needed to buy a special dryer with a par of pants no one would buy it. And keep in mind that dryer should get its air from outside the house… New duct work or outside dryer location… sounds like quite an investment to me. So lets assume for a moment that it does all work, the way that they claim. Aren’t they at least being a little quiet in regards to reactivation, and what kind of a process that really is? And by not including that little part, wouldn’t you agree that they’re being a little dishonest with the public? What if that were your bow? Would you feel different? This is the new Achme bow, it’ll send them down the range at 600 fps! Achme disclaimer time – this bow requires it’s limbs to go through the patented Achme limb retensioning tensionometer every 100 arrows. Do you have an Achme retensioning tensionometer? Do you know how big one of these is? Do you know how much it costs? Will they do it for you? Have you ever even seen one? They say it’s real easy… Even a primate could do it! And if that doesn’t sound bad enough – to really compare to the carbon clothing analogy, you wouldn’t even be able to measure whether the arrow even went 600 fps right out of the box! That is marketing, snake oil and health tonic… But, it is your money, I really don’t care. |
RE: Minnesota Hunters Sue Scent Lok
ORIGINAL: Dr Andy Should I sue Bowflex Home Gym? Three days a week for 20mins and I still don't look anything like the guy in the commecial. Maybe Axe deodorant, I've used the stuff and the women don't swarm to me like flies to ****. I should sue them! How many other ads are there that overstate and exxagerate claims |
RE: Minnesota Hunters Sue Scent Lok
I wonder if T.R. will be forced tocease and desisthis crusade and be cited for libel if the suit goes in favor of the defendants?
My "guess" is the key to this suit will be in the definition of "reactivation" and "regeneration". I'm also wondering if the buck growl duping suit is next???:D |
RE: Minnesota Hunters Sue Scent Lok
ORIGINAL: outdoormafiaKP ORIGINAL: Dr Andy Should I sue Bowflex Home Gym? Three days a week for 20mins and I still don't look anything like the guy in the commecial. Maybe Axe deodorant, I've used the stuff and the women don't swarm to me like flies to ****. I should sue them! How many other ads are there that overstate and exxagerate claims I am all for sticking up for what is right. All I ask is change the system so loosers pays;) |
RE: Minnesota Hunters Sue Scent Lok
All I'm saying is na-nanny-boo-boo-stick-your-head-in-doo-doo!
|
RE: Minnesota Hunters Sue Scent Lok
I'm also wondering if the buck growl duping suit is next???:D |
RE: Minnesota Hunters Sue Scent Lok
ORIGINAL: Killer_Primate All I'm saying is na-nanny-boo-boo-stick-your-head-in-doo-doo! |
RE: Minnesota Hunters Sue Scent Lok
ORIGINAL: Germ ORIGINAL: outdoormafiaKP ORIGINAL: Dr Andy Should I sue Bowflex Home Gym? Three days a week for 20mins and I still don't look anything like the guy in the commecial. Maybe Axe deodorant, I've used the stuff and the women don't swarm to me like flies to ****. I should sue them! How many other ads are there that overstate and exxagerate claims I am all for sticking up for what is right. All I ask is change the system so loosers pays;) |
RE: Minnesota Hunters Sue Scent Lok
I bought the (as seen on tv)set of knives that is suppose to stay sharp forever and cut through pipe and then a tomato and all that good stuff,(even say so on the box). Them things couldnt cut a warm stick of butter when i bought them. They cost me $20 can i sue for lets say 2 mill? WOW give me a break
|
RE: Minnesota Hunters Sue Scent Lok
ORIGINAL: mbruizer187 I bought the (as seen on tv)set of knives that is suppose to stay sharp forever and cut through pipe and then a tomato and all that good stuff,(even say so on the box). Them things couldnt cut a warm stick of butter when i bought them. They cost me $20 can i sue for lets say 2 mill? WOW give me a break Hey, were you smoking pot when you ordered it? I’m just curious. |
RE: Minnesota Hunters Sue Scent Lok
These guys should have thought about the products effectiveness Before they spent thier money on it...especially since this controversy has been going on well before they shelled out the benjamins!
Truth in Advertising has been "Dead Down Wind" of the almighty dollar for years  This lawsuitis an act from people who seemed to have just awoken...where have they been? Where they "Sleep Shopping"??? |
RE: Minnesota Hunters Sue Scent Lok
IMO and experience scent lok does not work. With that said, what product is not sold with hype, and less than totalhonesty and disclosure? It will be interesting to see the outcome though.
|
RE: Minnesota Hunters Sue Scent Lok
ORIGINAL: buck_master_101 they dont claim there hard as rock they just state "like a rock" and they dont even state what or which part is like a rock.;) |
RE: Minnesota Hunters Sue Scent Lok
im gunna sue realtree and mossy oak becuz i dont know which one i wan more!!!! ah they are causing me frustration!!!
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:18 AM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.