NAD Takes on Origins Over Ad Claims

The National Advertising Division of the Council of Better Business Bureaus has recommended that cosmetics maker Origins modify or discontinue certain advertising claims for two Origins products. NAD determined that the advertiser could support certain claims.

NAD, the advertising industry’s self-regulatory forum, examined advertising for two Origins products—Brighter by Nature Skin Tone Correcting Serum and Youthopia Age Correcting Serum—as part of NAD’s ongoing monitoring program.

Claims at issue in advertising for Brighter by Nature included the following express claims:
• “It’s nature’s alternative to lasers.”
• “73% instant improvement in skin clarity.”
• “42% visible reduction in dark spots and discolorations.”
• “Considering costly laser resurfacing or chemical peels?Nature has an effective, yet gentle alternative. This clinically proven plant serum with Japanese Basil Leaf, Cucumber and naturally-derived Vitamin C helps zap the appearance of dark spots and create more even skin tone now and in the future.There’s no scarring or scorching skin.No downtime, no hefty price tag.”

NAD also examined the implied claim that the product is as effective as laser resurfacing and chemical peels.

Claims at issue in advertising for Youthtopia included:
• “Grow younger naturally.”
• “75% agreed their skin felt firmer.”
• “73% saw younger-looking skin with fewer lines.”
• “Powered by the legendary plants, Rhodiola rosea and Amalaki, and clinically proven by science, this potent complex rapidly and visibly helps restore firmness and elasticity to repair the appearance of lines and wrinkles.So what you see and feel is a tighter, tauter complexion that appears significantly younger.”

NAD also examined the implied claim that Youthtopia is a 100% natural cosmetic.

For the Brighter by Nature product, NAD reviewed evidence that included the advertiser’s clinical study, a double-blind and controlled study on conducted on 18 Asian women aged 27 to 73. The study report included only the statistically significant results.

NAD noted that the claim “It’s nature’s alternative to lasers” was followed by express, quantified performance claims that could be understood by consumers to mean that the product provides results comparable to laser or other cosmetic procedures. NAD recommended that the advertiser either avoid such comparison in future advertising or include as part of the claim a disclosure to make it clear that results are not equal to medical procedures. NAD also recommended that the advertiser include a clear and conspicuous disclosure concerning the limited population tested and make clear that the reduction in dark spots and discoloration was achieved after eight weeks of product use.NAD further recommended that the advertiser modify the claim referencing plant serum to make clear that the benefits described are achieved only with continued use of the product.

NAD noted in its decision that advertising claims for Youthtopia were based on an eight-week double-blind, controlled clinical study of 19 women, ages 41-60, who applied the product to their hands and faces twice daily and a four-week consumer use test of 52 subjects. In the clinical study, measurements were taken to assess skin firmness, skin lifting, skin barrier strength, fine lines and wrinkles, evenness of skin tone, age spots, skin clarity, skin radiance and facial imaging.

NAD noted that it had a number of concerns about the fit between the evidence submitted and the claims at issue, including concerns that the reference to Rhodiola rosea and Amalaki implied they had been shown to reduce lines and wrinkles and provide a more youthful appearance when there was no evidence in the record that either ingredient provided such benefits.

NAD determined that the claim “75% agreed their skin felt firmer” was supported but recommended that the advertiser clearly and conspicuously disclose that the results were based on ratings made by users after four weeks of use. NAD also recommended that the advertiser avoid conveying the unsupported message that the ingredients Rhodiola rosea and Amalaki have been proven to provide the promised benefits.NAD recommended that the advertiser discontinue the references to “rapidly,” “visibly” and “repair” based on the record.Finally, NAD recommended the advertiser discontinue claims that suggest complexions or users will appear “significantly” younger.

The company, in its advertiser’s statement, said it is pleased that NAD found certain claims supported by its evidence.

“With respect to NAD’s interpretation of the remaining claims, we respectfully disagree.Nonetheless as a strong supporter of the self-regulatory process, Origins will take the NAD’s recommendations into consideration in preparing future advertising for these products,” the company said.