Another implication is that hope may make consumers vulnerable to products that have no scientific backing or make outlandish claims about outcomes (e.g., as is true of many diet and sexual-enhancement products), because information processing focuses not on the true merits of the product or service but on its promise of making the goal possible. A laissez-faire doctrine that places the onus of deciding whether a product is appropriate for consumption on the consumer may not be effective, because motivated reasoning may preclude objective product evaluation. More stringent policies that regulate marketing communications coupled with consumer education and awareness programs may be necessary. Notably, and in support of the previous public policy implications, stricter standards for diet and nutritional supplements and products that claim to treat or cure disease (Anthony 2003), contexts in which hope is likely to be strong, are under consideration by the Federal Trade Commission.