Lymph Flow Reviews and Buyer Feedback
Review figures and eight named lines were supplied. The same pack calls them layout copy only, so this page audits them and publishes none of them as reviews.
There are no reviews on this site
This site shows no Lymph Flow star rating or testimonials.
The seller's review figures are not confirmed customer reviews, so they are checked below rather than printed as reviews. No stock photos are used.
The audit
Four checks on the supplied figures, each one arithmetic anybody can repeat.
The distribution as supplied
- 5★66%
- 4★21%
- 3★8%
- 2★3%
- 1★2%
The eight lines, by how often each repeats
- 4 of 8
Fair at a month. Wanted more in week one.
- 2 of 8
Daily habit stuck. Reordered before the last bottle.
- 2 of 8
Wanted a faster change. Called the desk. Stopped at two.
Three sentences, eight names, and two Patricks.
| Check | What was supplied | What it comes to |
|---|---|---|
| The average against its own distribution | 4.3 out of 5, from 66/21/8/3/2 per cent | Those percentages average 4.46. The published figure is lower than its own distribution, which is the opposite of the usual direction and no more accurate for it. |
| Written reviews against orders | 983 written, 9,397 orders | 10.5% of orders left a written review. |
| Recommend against the stars | 85% recommend | 5★ and 4★ together are 87% — again the headline figure is the lower one. |
| The eight published lines | 8 named buyers | They carry 3 distinct sentences between them, and two of the eight are called Patrick. |
| Six portrait photographs | supplied alongside the eight lines | None of them appears on this site. The pack calls the review block layout copy; putting faces to it would dress that copy up as something it is not. |
The FTC’s guidance for this industry is that “testimonials that report results more dramatic than users can generally expect are likely to be deceptive”, and that randomised controlled human trials are the evidence experts would require for a health-benefit claim.
What a real review section would need
- A verified purchase behind each line, and a way for you to see that verification.
- The full distribution, not a selection — including the one-star lines.
- Dates, so a five-year-old rating is not printed as current.
- Enough distinct text that eight reviews are not three sentences wearing eight names.
- No stock photography standing in for customers.
None of that was supplied, and so none of it is here. When the product has real reviews, they will belong on the sales page that takes the orders — this site never sees an order and so can never verify one.
What the FTC says about this
The Federal Trade Commission's Health Products Compliance Guidance is the document that governs how testimonials and endorsements may be used in health advertising. It is on the references page and it is the reason this page reads the way it does.
- Health Products Compliance GuidanceU.S. Federal Trade Commission“Testimonials that report results more dramatic than users can generally expect are likely to be deceptive”; randomised controlled human trials are “the most reliable form of evidence” for health-benefit claims.