ASA Adjudication on LA Muscle Ltd

Ad

A magazine ad for LA Muscle stated "... BEST-SELLING Weight Management FOR MEN & WOMEN! FAT STRIPPER GET YOURS TODAY! ... THE UK'S No.1 FAT STRIPPER ...".

Issue

The complainant challenged whether:

1. the name "Fat Stripper" was misleading;

2. the claim "The UK's No.1 Fat Stripper" could be substantiated; and

3. the claim "BEST-SELLING Weight Management FOR MEN & WOMEN" could be substantiated.

CAP Code (Edition 11)

Response

1. LA Muscle Ltd (LA Muscle) said "Fat Stripper" was the name of the product. They argued that previous ads had been approved by the CAP Copy Advice team. They said they had included a disclaimer in the ad that stated 'Not proven for fat loss' as advised by the CAP Copy Advice team.

2. They provided comparative market share and consumer survey data from a market research company which they believed showed "Fat Stripper" outsold all similar supplements in the UK.

3. They said the "Best-Selling" claim referred to the fact that "Fat Stripper" was their company's own best selling product of this type. They did not comment on or provide data to support the "weight management" claim.

Assessment

1. Upheld

The ASA considered that the product name "Fat Stripper" implied efficacy for fat loss. Because LA Muscle had not provided substantiation to show that, we concluded that the ad was likely to mislead. We noted a disclaimer in tiny print ran up the left-hand side of the ad, but considered that the size and position of the text would make it very likely to be overlooked by most readers. Although we acknowledged that "Fat Stripper" was the product name, we nevertheless considered that, because the product had not been proven for fat loss, the name "Fat Stripper" was likely to mislead. We considered that even a prominent disclaimer stating that their product had not been proven to aid weight loss would contradict the implied efficacy claim contained in the product name. We told LA Muscle not to feature the product name "Fat Stripper" in their marketing material again until and unless that name had been registered as a trademark.

2. & 3. Upheld

The ASA noted the data provided by the market research company showed that "Fat Stripper" was one of the UK market's leading supplements of this type in terms of market share at the time the data was collected. However, because the evidence provided by LA Muscle also showed that the market was rapidly changing in this sector and data were not provided up until the time at which the ad appeared, we considered that the evidence was insufficient to justify the 'No.1" and "Best-Selling" claims at the time the ad appeared.

The ASA noted LA Muscle believed  that "Bestselling"  referred to an in-house comparison of this product with others in their range. However, we considered that most readers would infer from the claim that LA Muscle sold more of their supplement than their competitors at the time the ad appeared. We also considered that, in conjunction with the name of the product, "Fat Stripper", most consumers would further understand the claim "weight management" to imply product efficacy. Because the advertiser did not provide substantiation for efficacy we concluded that the claim "BEST SELLING weight management for MEN & WOMEN" was likely to mislead.

The ad breached CAP Code clauses 3.1 (Substantiation) 7.1 (Truthfulness), 51.1, 51.4 and 51.8 (Weight Control)

Action

We told LA Muscle not to repeat the ad and told them to consult the CAP Copy Advice team before publishing future ads.

Adjudication of the ASA Council (Non-broadcast)