ASA Adjudication on A2Z Ozone UK

Ad

A magazine ad for a water purifier was headlined "NEW WATER PURIFIER". Body copy text stated "Simple, safe and effective using ozone generation. For drinking, bathing, youthful-looking skin, alkalizing, aids respiration. No replacement parts required, one off payment £90.50 + P&P. Tel: 01267 281161".

Issue

The complainant challenged whether:

1. the efficacy claims for the product were misleading and could be substantiated, and

2. the claim "effective using ozone generation" was misleading and could be substantiated.

CAP Code (Edition 11)

Response

A2Z OZONE UK (A2Z) said ozone was used in the UK in the sanitisation of public and hospital swimming pools and they believed that this was proof of ozone's effectiveness as a sanitizer. They said the supplier of the water purifier was based in Kentucky, USA and that their website stated that the US Food and Drug Administration had amended its food additive regulations to permit ozone generation as an anti-microbial agent. They submitted a list of scientific and medical references regarding ozone from their supplier.

Assessment

1., & 2. Upheld

The ASA considered that the claims that the water purifier was alkalizing, aided respiration and produced youthful looking skin were breakthrough claims that required a body of robust product-specific evidence, consisting of clinical trials conducted on people, in order to substantiate them. We noted that the document provided by A2Z was a history of ozone and its therapeutic uses from 1885 to 1994, and referred to some research on the use of ozone in medicine. We also noted that the document did not refer to ozone-purified water or whether such water was effective in producing youthful looking skin, aiding respiration and was alkalizing. We therefore did not consider that the document provided enough evidence to support the efficacy claims made in the ad. Moreover, we noted that we had not seen any evidence that the water purifier contained ozonegenerating technology. We therefore concluded that the claims had not been substantiated and that the ad was misleading,

The ad breached CAP Code clauses 3.1 (Substantiation), 7.1 (Truthfulness) and 50.1 (Health and beauty products and therapies).

Action

The ad must not appear again in its current form.

Adjudication of the ASA Council (Non-broadcast)