ASA crackdown on misleading nutrition supplement ads

29 Jul 2022 --- UK-based Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) is upholding findings that three vitamin supplement companies used misleading or fake claims in the Google search advertising. The advertising watchdog investigated three ads from BetterCo, three ads from HeyNutrition and two ads from Purolabs Nutrition. All three companies’ paid-for Google search ads had some variation of “UK’s Top 5 Vitamin D Ranked” or “Best Ashwagandha of 2021 Ranked.” For each site, the product to be ranked was specific to each company’s products and, of course, listed each company’s product as number one.

NutritionInsight reached out to all three companies, but none responded to requests for comment in time for publication.

Fighting misinformation
The ASA is an independent advertising regulation entity that uses advertising codes set by the Committee of Advertising Practices (CAP). It works across all levels of media, including the internet, television and radio to help ensure that consumers are not being misled or misinformed by advertisers by investigating complaints and active monitoring. 

Misleading advertising has increasingly come under fire, especially in the UK. Just yesterday, Action on Salt and ShareAction, two nutrition activism focused charities called for four of the worlds top companies to remove misleading nutrition claims from their packaging. 

However, mislabeling and misleading is a global problem. The US Food and Drug Administration is currently updating what can be labeled as “healthy” in a bid to both encourage companies to make healthier foods and keep consumers informed about the products they choose

“Clinical” nutrition
The three BetterCo trading as BetterVits’ ads all ran to a website called “Clinical Reviews” that was owned by BetterCo. Each of the review pages had text that stated that the reviews had gone through a “strict analysis and comparison test” that studied the ingredients, quality, and efficacy of the products and included a link to the BetterVits homepage. This applied to its vitamin D, probiotic and glucosamine supplements. 

According to the ASA, it was not clear that these were commercial ads and therefore could make consumers think these were marketing ads. The complaint was upheld because the ASA says that CAP holds that “marketing communications must not falsely claim or imply that the marketer was acting for purposes outside its trade, business, craft or profession” and “must make clear their commercial intent if that was not obvious from the context.”

The ASA found that all three companies’ Google search ads may have misled customers.BetterCo says it is now conducting an internal review of their advertising practices. The ASA says that the ads must not reappear or be republished in their current form.

Trustworthy reviews?
HeyNutrition confirmed that it owned a website called “Trustworthy Reviews,” which listed its turmeric, ashwagandha and vitamin D supplements as the top ranking product of its type in each of its reviews. Across all three sites, HeyNutrition’s products were also all given a “9.7 out of ten, based on several hundred votes.” 

Originally, HeyNutrition stated it believed the small text at the bottom of the sites’ pages was enough to inform consumers that it was a marketing site. However, In May, the company stated that it would increase the size and revise the text to make marketing intent explicit, as well as adding a statement at the top of each page acknowledging that the website’s owner may “receive commission from sales.”

ASA upheld the complaint stating that it violated CAP and could mislead consumers into thinking that Trustworthy Reviews was an unaffiliated and unbiased entity as opposed to a marketing ad.

Exploring falsehoods
Purolabs Nutrition did much the same as the other two. It owned and operated the website Wellness Explorer which presented itself in such a way that the ASA held the average consumer would believe that the site belonged to an independent reviewer when in fact, the site is owned by the top listed company.

However, Purolabs Nutrition’s sites did have disclaimers stating that read: “This website has a direct monetary connection with Purolabs and receives financial compensation when you buy using our links.” Moreover, the disclaimers also stated that the relationship between these two companies could affect product rankings.

Nevertheless, the ASA still upheld its original assessment stating it was concerned that the site “gave the impression that Wellness Explorer provided independent reviews grounded in research and product testing, and positioned the website as an educational resource or buyer’s guide.”

Edited by William Bradford Nichols