ASA Adjudication on Home Office

Ad

A TV ad, in the FRANK campaign, to raise awareness of the dangers of cannabis use, stated "With stronger strains than ever before, the more you mess with cannabis, the more it could mess with your mind".

Issue

KFx, a drug consultancy, and three other viewers challenged whether the claim "stronger strains than ever before" was misleading and could be substantiated.

BCAP TV Code

Response

The Home Office explained that the level of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) in cannabis was a measure of its potency.  They said the claim was based on the confirmed increase in the potency of 'sinsemilla' forms of cannabis; this was confirmed in the Home Office Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD) report and supported by the findings of the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA) 2004 report, entitled 'Overview of cannabis potency in Europe'.

The Home Office accepted that sinsemilla was not itself technically a strain but in the context of the ad the word 'strain' referred to types of cannabis plant that shared certain characteristics or qualities.  They argued that the use of language in FRANK advertising was tailored specifically for an 11- to 18-year-old target audience.  They believed the audience and the wider public would, generally, be unaware of the scientific complexities in the definition of the word 'strain', the different methods of cultivation and the range of relevant storage factors which affected potency.

The Home Office maintained that the audience required wording that conveyed the potential risks involved with cannabis use and in that context, they believed the wording was a clear, comprehensible way of communicating that some cannabis had become recently, on average, more potent than it had been in the past.

The Home Office said selective breeding (i.e. that used to cultivate sinsemilla) was a recognised technique used to optimise THC production. They said the authors of the 2004 EMCDDA report, in an editorial in Addiction magazine, stated "...What has changed throughout Europe and elsewhere is the appearance, from the early 1990s, of herbal cannabis grown from selected seeds by intensive indoor methods. This material, best described as domestically produced 'sinsemilla' (from the Spanish sinsemilla - without seeds), is also known as 'skunk', 'buds' or 'nederwiet' ..."  They said it was clear from an authoritative source that terms such as sinsemilla or 'skunk' were used frequently as umbrella terms in the absence of an agreed consistent nomenclature and could encompass issues such as selective breeding.  The Home Office pointed out that the main author of the EMCDDA report, Dr Leslie King, a government advisor and former Head of the Drugs Intelligence Unit, Forensic Science Service, was also an expert who gave oral evidence for the 2006 ACMD report.

The Home Office accepted that the analysis of cannabis strength reported in the ACMD report had methodological shortcomings because only cannabis seized by law enforcement agencies had been assessed.  They nonetheless maintained that it was currently the best source of data for the UK.

The Broadcast Advertising Clearance Centre (BACC) said they had obtained the view of their medical consultant, who believed the claim was acceptable.  They sent a copy of a report by the ACMD entitled 'Further consideration of the classification of cannabis under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971'.  They pointed out that the report said there had been an increase in the potency of sinsemilla (the highest potency herbal cannabis, constituting the flowering tops of unfertilised female cannabis plants) over recent years.

Assessment

Not upheld

The ASA noted the BACCs consultant had commented on the claim that cannabis "can mess with your mind" rather than the challenged claim.  We noted sinsemilla was a general classification of cannabis product due to its cultivation method, which involved the creation of unfertilized female plants to boost THC levels  and that the term was used as an umbrella term that could encompass issues such as selective breeding. We understood that the available data on cannabis potency was based on an analysis of cannabis seized by law enforcement agencies; the data was incomplete because cannabis was an illegal substance with no market controls.

We noted the ACMD and EMCDDA reports on which the claim was based confirmed that there had been an increase in the potency of sinsemilla but little evidence that the potency of resin or imported herbal cannabis had changed.   The ACMD report stated that cannabis resin accounted for 60-70% of seizures and that there was uncertainty about how much the remaining 30-40% was represented by sinsemilla and how much by traditional herbal cannabis.  We noted, however, from several editorials that there had been a reported increase in domestically produced sinsemilla.

We noted sinsemilla was not a strain of cannabis but was a growing technique.  We considered, however, that viewers were likely to understand from the claim that there was cannabis of varying strengths and that some cannabis had a higher potency than that available in previous years.  Because the Home Office had shown that the potency of sinsemilla was higher than in previous years, we concluded that the ad was unlikely to mislead.

We investigated the ad under CAP (Broadcast) TV Advertising Standards Code rules 5.2.1 (Evidence) and 5.4.6 (Comparative advertising) but did not find it in breach.

Action

No further action required.

Adjudication of the ASA Council (Broadcast)