TaoPatch – Is it a scam?

Thanks for your investigations. I was on the path of the biophotons being a pseudoscience. Everything looks really scammy indeed. I have MS and I have bought the superearlybird offer on indiegogo for $99,- This money I can loose just out of interest (maybe I am sensitive for placebo after all 🙂 They also sell a double pack for $999,- That’s real money. Thanks!

Thanks for your investigative efforts! I was intrigued by the TaoPatch but was sceptical, especially after reading Maria Konnikova’s wonderful book ‘The Confidence Game. Why We Fall for It…Every Time’ (2016). Over the years I have put a lot of money and hope into things that in the end proved useless (not all were scams, and some may have proved useful had I used them more systematically).

When I saw the ad for Taopatch I laughed, I thought they were a joke. I spent $99 and tried them, and I was wrong. They worked. I have MS with very very poor balance. Could not walk tie to toe straight line. 15 min after wearing the Taopatchs I was walking a straight line. If it is placebo the it has been working for the past 2 weeks!

I’m a Certified Personal Trainer…
I don’t have MS.

Also, i have no association with Taopatch company/associates… none whatsoever.

I got and tried the product to make personal assessment about its effect.

It produces noticeable effect on my body, so it does function, at the very least.

It’s effect as described seems to be plausible (converting heat into light frequency) since my peripheral nervous system (PNS) senses its stimuli. There is no signature with these stimuli (i.e., not targeted to autogenic or non-autogenic tissue), from my own observations, but this is not a clinical paper.

However, what seems clear is that “my senses” are noticeably heightened. Proprioception is improved while performing manual tasks, hand-eye coordination exercises and sports. In fact, to relax, it’s best for me to remove the one pad. Effect subsides after 1-2 hours, in my case.

My feedback is that the stimuli can be useful for “sluggish PNS” subjects, and may be worth some amount of personal trial, per doctor-patient review of possible pros and cons in each case.

I got a 3-pack, but only need one at a time. It is less intense on my back, between shoulder blades (vs on my sternum).

Anyway, all this is to say that there is something there… further, it may be useful to various folks… it’s NOT a useless ripe-off as your article seems to suggest.

Have you at least tried it once or twice???

I have been using Taopatches since early July 2020 and absolutely love them. They are not a cure but they have made significant improvements to my MS and I wouldn’t be without them. My osteopath has seen the improvements first hand – he has been seeing me for years and cannot believe how much my spasticity has decreased since using the Taopatches along with other benefits. I am writing about my journey with them. I have no affiliation with Taopatches but I am more than happy to shout from the rooftops about how amazing they are. If you do them, follow the instructions properly and set realistic expectations and do not expect to just put them on and walk because that isn’t going to happen. You should also be exercising every day and eating well – this is just another bit of the jigsaw. You can read my journey in my blog – https://lifewithms.wixsite.com/mymsjourney

There are several issues being discussed here. One is the lack of scientific evidence for Taopatch. That seems unequivocal. There is none! But still it seems to work – for some people. Either this is because the necessary scientific studies have not been done (A) or the way Taopatch works is unknown to science, and therefore the scope of any study cannot be properly determined (B), or it is a placebo (C). I think A, even if it was done, would be unlikely to provide supporting evidence, B is entirely possible, and C is very likely. B or C both seem valid assumptions.

I have no idea how B could be determined but I do wonder why C is being denigrated? What is wrong with purchasing something that is guaranteed to work in a certain percentage of cases purely on the basis of suggestion? Obviously, it would be no good labelling the device as a ‘placebo’, as this would undermine its likely effect, which is based on it being believed in as curative.

C ‘works’ because B is believed in. The beneficial effect of C alone is a scientific fact, and this would be magnified if B turned out to be true as well. But for the moment, B remains unproven. It is generally accepted that roughly a third of participants in trials are helped by placebos. Personally, if I was suffering from a condition like MS, I would consider an investment in something like Taopatch rather like a wager on a three horse race. If I ‘won’, and my condition was helped, I would be over the moon. If I ‘lost’, and the device had no effect, I would take it on the chin and move on. However, if, as it seems, I could return to the bookmaker and ask for my money back, I would be laughing all the way to the bank. Even if it turned out that the bookmaker had scarpered, or refused my request, I would still feel it had been a worthwhile bet. 33% success rate odds is not at all bad!

However, if the placebo effect is the only one that is valid, and it’s efficacy relies on the purported ‘science’ behind any claims made, putting the dampener on those claims is a questionable tactic. I understand the author’s motivation, but I find it somewhat disingenuous of him to suggest that he supports any benefits people might experience from the placebo effect of Taopatch while simultaneously undermining the basis on which that effect rests.

Luckily, the alternative potentially curative effect of Taopatch still exists as B, and for most people, this is what they would probably, in their heart of hearts, tend to believe, anyway, as they will probably have already exhausted all the more orthodox avenues. There are distinct parallels here with homeopathy. This is also a pseudo science, as the author would define it. The modality has not been proven, scientifically. However, there is an alternative suggested reason for homeopathy working that lies outside the remit of conventional thinking. This is what users tend to believe in. And then there is the same placebo effect, which of course relies on that unconventional belief. Homeopathy’s success is almost entirely anecdotal – but then so too is the effect of hugging on mood. Anecdotal ‘evidence’ can be disparaged, and certainly found unscientific, but not ignored. The oddest part, to me, of homeopathic success stories is their effect on animals and young children, who, it is assumed, are immune to suggestion – on which the placebo effect depends.

The world is awash with scams that seek to separate people from their money. People should be helped to learn how to protect themselves from the worst of these, but really, in the end, it is up to each individual to decide for themselves whether they want to part with relatively modest sums in what is, in this case, a wager with well defined odds. I certainly wouldn’t agree that Taopatch is an out and out scam. A true scam has no defenders, after the event, whereas there are innumerable attestations of benefits gained from using Taopatch. There are also plenty of people saying it didn’t work for them. I haven’t ascertained the numbers here, but it would be intriguing to know what percentage had or had not benefited, as that might help determine whether B or C was the most likely causative agent.

My conclusion is that the purchase of Taopatch is a calculated risk, akin, as I said, to a wager on a three horse race, but one where the horse you chose might well have an unscientifically defined superpower. What’s not to like about that?