TwoStep wrote:I was intrigued by this company when their product was undergoing trials, so I watched a video from the CEO to investors announcing the “surprising” outcome of their trial: The patients had improved erections, but a similar improvement was noted in the placebo group where the gel had no active ingredient.
Their response was to remove the active ingredient (vasodilator) and just sell the placebo gel as Eroxon. In my opinion it is an obvious scramble to recoup investment in a failed product that didnt outperform placebo. And why the placebo gel works could be down to either placebo effect itself or the stimulation of rubbing anything onto the penis.
Also, when their advertising material says that their product leads to the downstream release of nitric oxide (NO), the nitric oxide is just the established explanation of how erections occur. It has no direct connection with how the product works other than restating the known connection (NO release=erection).
I thought the same about this company/product, and figured the reason was either what you said, or that they failed to get regulatory approval to market their vasodilator in an OTC product so scrambled to get *something* to market still. Either way, seems to be a sham product