6 Simple Products That Advertisers Pretend Are Complicated

Not according to this study, where dental health experts concluded that as long as your toothpaste contains fluoride and powdered calcium (and basically all of them do), your teeth are going to be just fine. And what about that claim that four out of five dentists think you should use an Oral-B toothbrush? When some researchers did a poll, they found that most dentists don't think there's any significant difference, with 62 percent saying that it's not about what you have, but how you use it.

That's right -- there is no brush advanced enough that it will save you from learning proper brushing technique and then, most importantly, remembering to actually do it.

Not so long ago, men removed their excess facial hair with a single-blade cutthroat razor, or if they were jungle commandos, a Bowie knife. Then safety razors became popular around World War I -- they had a simple handle with a small angled blade at the end that made it much harder to slice open an artery before breakfast.

It was a fantastic invention, and there wasn't much that could be improved upon in the design -- it's a razor blade attached to a stick, and it does what it's supposed to do. When it comes to innovation, razors are more like toothpicks than cars.

But that hasn't stopped Gillette from spending a century trying to find ways to convince consumers that each new version of the razor-on-a-stick is a game changer. For instance, in 1999, they punched the days of low-tech shaving right in the dick by inventing the Mach 3, a shaving experience so advanced that your clothing will literally explode off your body:

But there was no way they could stop there. For 21st century stubble, three blades isn't anywhere near enough. You might as well just try to slap that beard off. That's why Gillette spent eight years and earned 20 patents designing the Gillette Fusion, a five-blade razor that made the Mach 3 look like a giant piece of shit.

According to Gillette, their team of engineers engaged in "intensive laboratory and clinical research" and "thousands of test shaves" to bring us this Manhattan Project of razors. Apparently, the result was two more blades!

But this shit ain't done. In 2011, they introduced an "advanced, low-resistance coating," a "blade stabilizer," "lubricating polymers," and all sorts of other wonders, complete with a technical video that explains what all this stuff does. So why are these guys building razors and not working for NASA?

Because none of it does shit. According to consumer studies, not only is there no practical difference between the various Gillette razors, but people can't even spot the differences between brands, even if they come equipped with warp drives and flux capacitors. In 2005, a judge forced the company to retract some claims from their advertising, ruling that they ranged from "greatly exaggerated" to "literally false."

It's not that their razors don't work. They work great. They worked great in 1975. They just can't admit that they nailed the design back during the Wilson administration.

Unless you're bald (or a hippie), shampoo is a daily essential. But with a billion brands out there, how do you even enter the shampoo aisle without collapsing into a fetal position? After all, isn't that shit just soap for your hair? How can there be ten thousand meaningful variations on that concept?

Well, advertisers have been taking advantage of the confusion since the '50s -- this early ad said that its shampoo cleaned your hair with "floating action" and came in a bottle designed by a doctor, as though that's important. It also bragged about how much lather it produced, a claim you may recognize from every shampoo ad ever. And no, lather actually has nothing to do with the cleansing process -- it's only there because we expect it.

Other shampoo ads have long claimed that their detergent will be gentle, while its competitors will violently tear through your follicles like wildfire and leave second-degree burns on your scalp. In reality, detergent is the active ingredient in every shampoo made since the 1930s, so unless you're trying to add some shine to your retinas, there's never going to be enough present to hurt.

As a last resort, shampoo makers started going wild with the razor strategy of pouring on the meaningless technobabble. Like in this commercial for shampoo with a "pro-vitamin formula that actually strengthens your hair from inside!" In 2011, Garnier Fructis bragged about its "antioxidant fruit extracts" that were "proven to be four times healthier." If you read the fine print that flashes by, you'll see that the claim was proven ... when compared to a shampoo that doesn't contain a conditioner, which nearly all shampoos do. That's like saying your car stereo is way better when compared to a bicycle.

A recent commercial from Head & Shoulders hit bullshit critical mass with its "high performance HydraZinc formula." That sounds like something you'd use to buff your Pokemon. Shockingly, this mythological element doesn't help -- a study found that expensive shampoos are no more effective than cheap drugstore brands. Unless you need a special shampoo for medical reasons, there's no need to pay more than a few bucks for a bottle. Unless it turns out 30 years from now that HydraZinc gives everyone mutant superpowers, which is entirely possible, we suppose.

So advertisers in the '80s introduced an amazing "double action formula" that fights wetness and odor, just like every other deodorant ever made, but with action! The '80s also brought us Speed Stick's wide stick, for people with abnormally wide armpits, we guess. Ban countered with a "wide oval shape," for those unfortunate souls with gigantic ovular armpits.

Modern deodorant is even more ridiculous, as now it comes with "motion-sensing technology." It's like a Kinect in your armpits.

There's a separate motion-sensing deodorant for men, because we all know that women wear deodorant designed to protect them while shoe shopping, while men wear deodorant to protect them while trekking through the wilderness. That's why deodorants are specially designed for men and women -- with different packaging and scents, anyway. The active ingredient is present in equal quantities in both, but by marketing them as different, manufacturers can bump up the price. So we guess a more accurate slogan would be "Strong enough for a man, made to rip off a woman."

This 1995 Huggies ad introduces the stretchable diaper. With strategically placed elastic strips, your baby will no longer unleash a fountain of unmentionable horror when his or her diaper falls down. It's such a useful innovation that we're surprised nobody came up with it sooner. Oh wait, they did, in 1994. And a decade before that.

So if we've had perfect-fitting diapers for decades, where can you go from there? To material that stretches in eight directions, asshole! These bad boys are designed for babies who move, not those weak, lazy babies who just lie there like slugs. Then, in 2011, Huggies introduced the diaper that changes everything. How did it revolutionize the design of crap receptacles? They're easier to put on moving babies!

Of course, the other important factor here is absorption. So, as you can imagine, diaper manufacturers are eager to convince us that their brand can withstand a veritable tsunami of urine.

Wait, did their older diapers not protect from leaks? Isn't that the entire point of a diaper? No matter, now there's a "Leak Lock System" with "super-absorbent material" for parents who like to give their kids a nightcap.

Some diapers are better at absorbing than others, but it has nothing to do with how many extreme adjectives their ads use. Not that those can help you decide anyway, since there are more "ultras" and "supers" in the diaper aisle than there are in a comic book store.

That ad says that Charmin is more absorbent than "the regular stuff," which is a typical claim. But then in 2008, they introduced TP with "diamond-weave texture," which is better because diamonds.

Just look at all that technology! They zoomed in on it and everything! They don't actually explain what makes it better, but apparently the public can only be enthralled by flashy, blinged-out toilet paper for so long before their assholes become complacent. So in 2010, Charmin brought out the big guns and introduced an enhanced diamond weave.

How did they enhance their weave? They didn't say. Sure, that regular weave got you through a couple of years, but that was the past. If you're not using the latest and greatest in the rough and tumble world of 2010, you might as well be wiping with a belt sander.

Charmin isn't the only company guilty of spicing up their toilet paper with meaningless innovations, but thanks to their coprophiliac bears, they're certainly the creepiest. Don't get suckered in by the siren call of a silky smooth bathroom experience -- Consumer Reports concluded that Walmart's brand is just as good as any of Big Toilet Paper's offerings, and at half the price. Shockingly, it turns out that your ass isn't that picky.

You can read more from Mark at his website.

For more ways you're suckered by bullshit, check out 5 Ways Hollywood Tricks You Into Seeing Bad Movies and 5 Creepy Ways Video Games Are Trying to Get You Addicted.

And be sure to head over to Cracked's YouTube Page where you can see exclusive content of all our sexy, sexy actors.

Or stop by LinkSTORM to discover why you don't own nearly enough Saltines.

Do you have an idea in mind that would make a great article? Then sign up RIGHT NOW and pitch your first article today! Do you possess expert skills in image creation and manipulation? Mediocre? Even rudimentary? Are you frightened by MS Paint and simply have a funny idea? You can create an infographic and you could be on the front page of Cracked.com tomorrow!

And don't forget to follow us on Facebook, Twitter, and Tumblr to get jokes sent straight to your brain matter. Are you on Google+? So are we!