ASA Adjudication on GlaxoSmithKline UK Ltd

Ad

Two magazine ads for Sensodyne Total Care Extra Fresh toothpaste.

a. One ad showed a photograph of a dentist that was labelled "Dr. Stemmer B.D.S. UK". A quote above the photograph stated '"Sensodyne has always been my first mode of treatment for sensitivity"'. Text below an illustration of the product stated "Dentists recommend Sensodyne for sensitive teeth".

b. A second ad was headlined "'I recommend Sensodyne'". The ad included a photograph of a woman, labelled "Jill Ward, Dentist. B.D.S. UK", and an illustration of the product. Text at the foot of the ad stated "Dentists recommend Sensodyne for sensitive teeth".

Issue

1. A member of the public queried whether the use of the title "Dr." in the text "Dr. Stemmer B.D.S. UK" in ad (a) was appropriate.

2. Colgate-Palmolive (UK) Ltd challenged the endorsement of Sensodyne by a health professional.

3. The ASA challenged whether the references to the treatment of sensitivity in both ads meant they made medicinal claims for a product that did not have a Marketing Authorisation from the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).

CAP Code (Edition 11)

Response

1. GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) explained that Dr Stemmer was a practising dental surgeon and was titled 'Dr Stemmer' on his practice literature. They said they had received a letter of consent from Dr Stemmer prior to the ad's appearance, which confirmed that he held a B.D.S. (V.U. Manc) qualification and that he signed himself 'Dr Stemmer'.

GSK said the ad made clear that Dr Stemmer was a dentist: the letters B.D.S appeared after his name and a large strapline, "Dentists recommend Sensodyne for sensitive teeth", appeared at the base of the ad. They therefore believed the use of the term 'Dr' was justified.

2. GSK explained that the product illustrated in the ads, Sensodyne Total Care Extra Fresh, was a cosmetic product, not a licensed medicine. Although they understood that the endorsement of medicinal products by healthcare professionals was not permitted by the Code, they believed the endorsement of a cosmetic product by a healthcare professional, in non-broadcast advertising, would be acceptable under the Code. They said they wished to continue using health professional endorsement of unlicensed products in the Sensodyne range in their non-broadcast advertising.

3. GSK acknowledged that the claim "Sensodyne has always been my first mode of treatment for sensitivity" could be construed as a medicinal claim for a product that did not have a Marketing Authorisation. They said they would remove the claim from future ads for Sensodyne Total Care Extra Fresh.

Assessment

1. Upheld

The ASA acknowledged that Dr Stemmer was a qualified dentist and understood that he used the title 'Dr' in all self-references. Although we agreed that ad (a) made clear Dr Stemmer was a dentist, we considered that the reference to 'Dr' in the ad implied Dr Stemmer held a general medical qualification. Because we understood that he did not, we considered that the ad could mislead.

On this point, ad (a) breached CAP Code clauses 3.1 (Substantiation) and 7.1 (Truthfulness).

2. Upheld

We noted the product featured in the ads was a cosmetic, not a medicine. We understood, however, that there were four licensed products in the Sensodyne range and, although the ads included an illustration of Sensodyne Total Care Extra Fresh, we considered that the statements of endorsement, "Sensodyne has always been my first mode of treatment for sensitivity" in ad (a), "I recommend Sensodyne" in ad (b) and "Dentists recommend Sensodyne for sensitive teeth" in ads (a) and (b), were likely to be seen as relating to the whole Sensodyne range, not merely to Sensodyne Total Care Extra Fresh. Because the Code stipulated that marketers should not use health professionals or celebrities to endorse medicines, we considered that the claims, which implied the endorsement by a health professional of the whole Sensodyne range, four products in which were licensed medicines, were unacceptable.

On this point, the ads breached CAP Code clause 50.17 (Health & beauty products and therapies - Medicines).

3. Upheld

We contacted the MHRA, which asserted that the claims "Sensodyne has always been my first mode of treatment for sensitivity" and "Dentists recommend Sensodyne for sensitive teeth" were medicinal, because they referred to the treatment of tooth sensitivity. We considered that, because a photograph of Sensodyne Total Care Extra Fresh appeared in the ads, the claims were likely to be seen as referring to that product in particular, as well as to the Sensodyne range generally. We noted a Marketing Authorisation was needed from the MHRA before marketers were able to make medicinal claims for their products and understood that Sensodyne Total Care Extra Fresh was unlicensed.

On this point, the ads breached CAP Code clause 50.11(Health & beauty products and therapies - Medicines).

Action

We told GSK not to use the title 'Dr' in ads unless it was backed by a general medical qualification. In addition, we told them to ensure that future non-broadcast ads, which featured the endorsement of products by a health professional, made clear that the endorsement related specifically to a cosmetic product and not to a range of products if some of the products in that range were medicines. We welcomed GSK's willingness to amend their ads and told them to ensure future ads did not include medicinal claims, direct or implied, for products that did not hold a Marketing Authorisation. We advised them to seek guidance from the CAP Copy Advice team before issuing further, similar material.

Adjudication of the ASA Council (Non-broadcast)