ASA Adjudication on Estee Lauder Cosmetics Ltd

Ad

A magazine ad for skin treatments had the headline "#1 OUR BEST REPAIR FORMULAS FOR YOUR FIGHT AGAINST VISIBLE AGEING". Text underneath stated "There's a reason they're our best-sellers around the world: dramatic results ... Today, our powerful repair serums are outstanding in the significant benefits they offer your skin. These targeted treatments deliver instant, visible results in the fight against ageing. Find the repair serum that is right for you. Then use it faithfully and take control of your beautiful future".

The opposite page featured an image of repair products Perfectionist [CP+] and Idealist. Text for Perfectionist [CP+] stated "Correct the appearance of lines and wrinkles fast. New. Perfectionist [CP+] Wrinkle Lifting Serum. Advanced with Wrinkle Lift Restructuring Peptides, our most powerful wrinkle-fighter ever. The result? Deep, prominent wrinkles are reduced in appearance. Skin reclaims a remarkably, smoother, younger more lineless look". Text for Idealist stated "Idealist Pore Minimizing Skin Refinisher. Penetrates deep within surface layers to deliver our most dramatic skin resurfacing benefits ever. Makes enlarged pores look up to 1/3 smaller instantly. Skin looks incredibly clear, even-toned and smooth".

Issue

The ASA challenged whether:

1. the claim "Wrinkle Lifting Serum. Advanced with Wrinkle Lift Restructuring Peptides, our most powerful wrinkle-fighter ever. The result? Deep, prominent wrinkles are reduced in appearance. Skin reclaims a remarkably smoother, younger more lineless look" for Perfectionist [CP+] was misleading and could be substantiated, and

2. the claim "Penetrates deep within surface layers to deliver our most dramatic skin resurfacing benefits ever" for Idealist was misleading and could be substantiated.

CAP Code (Edition 11)

Response

1. Estée Lauder Cosmetics Ltd (Estée Lauder) considered that the claims would be understood, when taken as a whole, to be referring to an improvement in the appearance of lines and wrinkles only. They said the resulting effect of the product on the appearance of skin was clear; the "appearance" of wrinkles would be reduced and the skin would "look" smoother, younger and more lineless. Estée Lauder explained that the reference to lift/lifting in the product name, Perfectionist CP+ Wrinkle Lifting Serum, and the trademarked ingredient, Wrinkle Lift Restructuring Peptides, referred to the general effect the product had on the appearance of wrinkles - a plumping or lifting in appearance. They considered the ad did not imply a physical lifting of the skin, and provided two clinical studies in support of the claim that the product reduced the appearance of lines and wrinkles.

Estée Lauder said they considered that Perfectionist [CP+] was their most effective product for fighting the appearance of wrinkles. They sent results of a further clinical study carried out on their previous Perfectionist formula and said, when compared with the studies on the new formula, the results showed that the latter was more effective at reducing the appearance of wrinkles.

2. Estée Lauder explained that Idealist was an exfoliant that worked within the surface layers of the skin. They considered it was widely accepted that exfoliants worked to remove the surface layers of dead skin, and that the reference to penetrating surface layers in the ad would make this clear to readers. Estée Lauder argued that the term "resurfacing" was an explicit reference to the effect of the product on the skins surface only. They argued that the claim did not imply that the product worked beyond the surface layers of the skin and they did not believe that consumers would interpret it in that way.  

Estée Lauder provided copies of two clinical studies, one on the current formulation of Idealist and one that compared the current product with an earlier formulation of Idealist. They said the first study demonstrated the exfoliating properties of the product, and showed that it was effective at improving the overall appearance of skin (reducing the appearance of pore size, improving skin texture and skin tone) when applied to surface layers. They said the comparative study showed that the new Idealist formula was also an improvement upon the previous product, particularly in terms of skin clarity and smoothness.

Assessment

1. Upheld

The ASA considered that the phrase "smoother, younger, more lineless look" was an accepted subjective claim for a standard moisturiser. We noted that the studies on the former and current versions of Perfectionist [CP+] showed that the current product was more effective at reducing the appearance of lines and wrinkles, and we therefore also considered that the comparative element of the claim, that Perfectionist [CP+] was Estée Lauder's "most powerful" wrinkle-fighting product, had been substantiated.

However, we considered that the references to "wrinkle-fighter", "Deep, prominent wrinkles reduced in appearance" and "remarkably [smoother, younger ... look]" constituted a strong performance claim for the product that went beyond that accepted for a standard moisturiser, and that required a high level of evidence to substantiate it. We also considered that the claim would be understood by consumers to mean that Perfectionist [CP+] would produce a remarkable, visible reduction in the appearance of deep, prominent wrinkles.

We noted that the two studies provided by Estée Lauder assessed the product's effect on the appearance of lines and wrinkles in 19 women between 45 and 71 years of age. Measurements were taken using digital photographic imaging and the studies' results showed that there was a reduction in the average appearance of lines and wrinkles across all participants, including those whose skin was defined within the parameters of 'moderate to heavy' and 'heavy' wrinkles at the start of the trial. However, we considered that it was not clear whether the same optical effect would be detected by a human observer, and we therefore also considered that the results did not indicate that consumers would experience a remarkable, "visible" reduction in the appearance of deep, prominent wrinkles. We also understood that no control product or placebo had been used in the trials, which we considered, in these circumstances, would be necessary for a claim that went beyond that of a standard moisturiser, but that Estée Lauder had relied on base measurements, taken from the participants' untreated skin before the trial commenced, as a control. We considered therefore that we had not seen appropriate evidence to demonstrate that Perfectionist [CP+] reduced the appearance of lines and wrinkles above and beyond that of a standard moisturiser, and we therefore concluded that the claim had not been substantiated and was misleading.

On this point the ad breached CAP Code clauses 3.1 (Substantiation), 7.1 (Truthfulness), 50.1 and 50.7 (Health and beauty products and therapies).

2. Not upheld

We understood that Idealist was an exfoliant. We considered that consumers would understand the claim "Penetrates deep within surface layers to deliver our most dramatic skin resurfacing benefits ever" to mean that the product had an exfoliating effect that was better than Estée Lauder's previous products. We noted that one of the clinical trials, a double-blind, controlled study, compared the current Idealist formula against the previous version of the product. We also noted that that study showed that the current Idealist performed better in terms of skin surface sebum levels, skin smoothness, tone and texture, blackheads and the appearance and size of pores than the old Idealist formula. We therefore concluded that the claim had been substantiated and was not misleading.

On this point we investigated the ad under CAP Code clauses 3.1 (Substantiation), 7.1 (Truthfulness), 50.1 and 50.7 (Health and beauty products and therapies) but did not find it in breach.

Action

The ad must not appear again in its current form.

Adjudication of the ASA Council (Non-broadcast)