Apex Medical Spa - I believe they used deceptive practices to obtain my business.

Apex continues to in my opinion advertise other physicians work as their own. A google imagine search or view of the manufacturers website will show the credited MD.

Except for the bikini photo which is a stock photo for plastic surgery. Hard to choose which I find more dishonest.Two years into selling Trusculpt Apex don't can't or won't show miraculous results from their own patients. Realself which is a rating site for procedures like this show a worth it rating of 60% for ID and 50% for 3D which to my understanding is virtually identical technology. I find those ratings low if people were seeing 24% average fat reduction.

Coolsculpting has 4300 reviews on the Realself site compared to 150 for Trusculpt and a much higher satisfaction rating. I'm not sure how Trucscupt can still be advertised as superior with a straight face. If close to true I think Trusculpt through word of mouth would not only have more reviews, but a much higher worth it rating,I found no evidence this was FDA approved as advertised by Apex and many others. It is FDA cleared which simply means the manufacturer Cutera said the technology was similar to older technology and granted permission to market it.

I've doctors that have stopped marketing Trusculpt.

I doubt that was because their patients were seeing advertised results. It's your money, mine is already gone.

I notified Dr. Ezeanoule in several ways that I feel his advertising is deceptive and nothing has changed.

I uploaded two photos where he has his name and logo on the bottom of other doctors before and after photos. The black bars appear to be hiding the credited doctors names. The girl in the bikini is a stock photo for plastic surgery and all of the patients on his website should be credited to other MDs. but read to me like they are his.Apex Medical Soa claims that Trusuclpt is FDA approved, I only found it to be FDA cleared which is a very low bar.

Clearance means Cutera the manufacturer piggybacked on older technology to market TrucsulptID. https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfpmn/pmn.cfm?ID=K180709Apex responded to my Google review and claims Cutera did studies that show average fat cell reduction on most patients of 24%. There are two studies on the FDA website one with 12 patients and the other with 15. Apex and Cutera in my opinion have been very deceptive in advertising this as if the average patient is getting 24% from those two extremely small studies.

One was done in 2017 on the 3D machine which has a very low satisfaction rating on Realself. I was unable to find the studies on Cutera's website at all, just a tiny footnote. They advertise results in such large font without proudly displaying their math. I think an honest company wouldn't advertise this way.

I don't see how Apex or Cutera have any basis for claiming how much fat reduction the average Trusculpt patient is receiving when it isn't being tested for to create a true average. What I do see on Realself is the worth it rating for Trusculpt 3D is 50% and ID is 60% based on 150 reviews. ID was around 90% when I made my purchase in 2019 and thought is was new technology,Trusculpt is often compared to methods such as Coolsculpting which has 4300 reviews and a 74% worth it rating on Realself. I find it hard to grasp if Trusculpt is so much better in practice that word would not have gotten out.

Trusculpt which has been around for years should have a similar number of reviews as Coolsculpting and a much higher worth it rating in my opinion.There are a lot of providers advertising Trusculpt in the same fashion as Apex Medical Spa. Stock photos and claims of 24% average fat reduction without the tiniest of foot notes as to where the number is coming from.

The FTC has written that advertisers much have at least the level of proof their ad claims and prominently disclose where claims like this are coming from. Hopefully one day they will act, if that day never comes learn from my loss of money not fat.