Friday, 29 January 2010

*Lee Crock - cancer sells

Lee Crock has a US patent for his miracle machine, but that might not save him from a potential breach of the UK's Cancer Act 1939.

UPDATE: The ASA have advised that a complaint under section 2.1 is not sustainable, so I have made a new complaint under other sections of the CAP code.

UPDATE, 10th April: ASA reply "...we have received a response from the advertisers... An agent for Lee's Fountain of Youth contacted us to explain that the ad would not be repeated and the 'energy cleaner' business dissolved with immediate effect." Result!

UPDATE, 10th April: The website promoted in the advert is no longer available, but can still be viewed in Google Cache and at You can also find Lee at his MySpace page. I'm not sure if his US operations are continuing, but if you'd like to know for sure, give him a bell on 740-783-0021 (740-783-3315 evenings - US number) or write to him at 'Universal Energy Center [sic], 19425 Harl Weiller Rd, Caldwell, Ohio 43724'.

My speculative ASA complaint was this...

"I write to complain about an advert that appeared in Nexus Magazine, entitled "Cancer cells".

I suspect the advert is in breach of one sections of the British Code of Advertising, Sales Promotion and Direct Marketing (CAP) Code, and in breach of the Cancer Act 1939.

For your convenience, I have made a scan of the advert available on a popular image sharing website.

I can provide a copy of the scan by email, or send an original copy of the leaflet by post, if required.

1. Nexus Magazine is published in the UK "under licence by Nexus Magazine (UK) Ltd". It is available in high street shops like WH Smiths.

2. The February-March 2010 issue (Vol. 17, No. 2, page 64) carried an advert entitled "Cancer cells".

3. Section 2.1 of the CAP code states “2.1 All marketing communications should be legal, decent, honest and truthful.”

4. The Cancer Act 1939 (amended) states "No person shall take any part in the publication of any advertisement... containing an offer to treat any person for cancer, or to prescribe any remedy therefor, or to give any advice in connection with the treatment thereof..."

5. I challenge whether the advert is "legal" (CAP code 2.1) under the Cancer Act 1939.

6. I confirm that I have no connections with the advertiser, with Nexus Magazine, or with the publishing industry in general. I confirm that I am not involved in legal proceedings with the advertiser or Nexus Magazine.

7. I confirm that I am happy to be identified as the complainant."


  1. I have used and made several of the machines. I have used them for years. I don't know how, but they do exert a robust effect on the mind and body. About the closest I could come to explaining it, in terms mainstream science understands, is the principle of a redox cell, in conjunction with the idea that the body does have an electrical field around it which extends far more than six inches from the body (the effective depth penetration of the "field" involved with Lee's machine). But then again, mainstream science, as an editor of Discover magazine found out, can't even explain how permanent magnets work, short of "virtual photons", LOL! So let's say it works by way of virtual photons. Problem solved.
    And Lee lived to be 85. Met any 85 year-old doctors lately? :)

  2. p.s. - Perhaps you should heed the saying "The proof of the pudding is in the eating" before you take drastic actions such as you have. Try it.

  3. Hi Anonymous,

    Please provide documentary evidence to substantiate your claims:

    (1) Lee Crock's machines exert a robust effect on mind and body
    (2) Mainstream has no explanations for how magnets work. (Did you, by any chance, mean 'magnetism'?)
    (3) Mainstream science explains magnets in terms of the action of photons
    (4) Therefore, magnets do not work in the dark. (Or work better, perhaps.)
    (5) The explanation of magnetic action at a distance as explained through photons also provides a systematic explanation of how Lee Crock's machines work
    (6) Doctors never live to 85 because they are too sceptical to use Lee Crock's machines

    Forgive me if I've misquoted you, but some of your claims were a little vague and, I fear, untempered by an education in science.


Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.