ASA Adjudication on Mattress Health Ltd

Ad

A leaflet, for a mattress cleaning service, was entitled "While you were SLEEPING they were eating and BREEDING" and featured a close-up image of a dust mite. Text stated "Dust mites, bacteria and fungi all live on your mattress causing many potential health problems … As clean as your mattress seems it will contain health threatening Dust Mites … Cleaning and de-contaminating your mattress is as important for children as bathing… 'Avoiding allergen exposure in infancy reduces the development of asthma' American Academy of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology, March 2001 Over 80% of Asthma sufferers are allergic to Dust Mite allergens. Figures from recent studies show Dust Mites are linked to allergic reactions. 85% of asthma sufferers have been proved to be allergic to dust mites ... Asthma kills 1,500 people per year. Only by eliminating the cause can the hygienic and allergy problems in the mattress be solved … Cot death blamed on baby-bed bacteria. Up to half of cot deaths might be caused by the bacteria Staphylococcus aureus which breeds in baby's mattresses. De Montfort University. Our Ultra Violet Light can destroy this bacteria. Fungi living in our pillows. Ten pillows were studied and more than a million spores of at least 16 different types of fungi were found. These spores can affect asthma and lung patients. North West Lung Centre Manchester We will kill and remove these spores."

Issue

1.  The complainant objected that the leaflet's implication that the service could protect against cot death and potentially fatal asthma appealed to the fear of parents.

2.  The ASA challenged whether the statements that linked exposure to allergens with asthma misleadingly implied that failure to use the service could result in people developing asthma.

CAP Code (Edition 11)

Response

The Healthy Sleep Group did not comment on the challenged claims but referred us to Mattress Health Ltd, who had devised the leaflet.Mattress Health said all the information in the leaflet came either from newspaper reports or from internet websites. They added that the quote about cot death came from De Montfort University and that facts about asthma could be found on numerous allergy websites. They asserted that it was correct that their machine could destroy the bacterium Staphylococcus aureus. They sent data supplied by the manufacturers of the UV lamp, entitled "Results of a Bacteriological study of Mattresses" which stated that one area of a 19-year-old mattress cleaned with the product contained 13 micro-organisms per 20 cm2 and another cleaned area had 2 micro-organisms per 20 cm2 compared to 1,000,000 micro-organisms for the uncleaned area, and that the results corresponded to a disinfecting effect of 99.99% deactivation. They pointed out that the cot death claim did not appear on the original leaflet template they sent to traders, but said they did use the quote because it came from a university study. Mattress Health disputed that the leaflet claimed that people could develop asthma if they did not use the service. They claimed they were referring to people who already had asthma. They argued that they quoted reliable sources that stated up to 85% of people with asthma were affected by dust mite excrement found in their mattresses.

Assessment

1. Upheld

We noted the leaflet stated "Asthma kills 1,500 people in Britain per year" and "Cot death blamed on baby-bed bacteria" and considered that the leaflet implied that the use of Mattress Health's cleaning service was proven to reduce the likelihood of cot death and asthma-related death.  We noted the bacteriological study but we considered it did not show that the product destroyed Staphylococcus aureus.  We considered that Mattress Health had not substantiated that their service had the claimed health benefits.  We also considered that the leaflet was an untargeted medium that could be read by a wide range of people including parents and asthma sufferers.  We concluded that the references to cot death and asthma were an unwarranted appeal to fear and that the leaflet was likely to cause unnecessary alarm to some recipients.  

On this point, the ad breached CAP Code clause 9.1 (Fear and distress).

2. Upheld

We noted the statement "Avoiding allergen exposure in infancy reduces the development of asthma" was attributed to the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology (AAAAI) but Mattress Health had not provided any information to support the validity of the claim.  We understood a presentation made to the AAAAI in March 2001 and a study published in the AAAAI's peer-reviewed Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (JACI) in 2007 evaluated the effect of reduction in food and house dust mite allergen exposure in preventing asthma and allergies in children who were genetically at risk of developing allergic disease; it concluded that allergen exposure in early life might increase the risk of childhood allergy and asthma, but that the protective effect of reduction in allergen exposure remained uncertain.  The authors advised that "strict food and house dust mite allergen avoidance should be considered for prevention of allergies in high-risk infants."  We noted the leaflet also stated "Over 80% of Asthma sufferers are allergic to Dust Mite allergens.  Figures from recent studies show Dust Mites are linked to allergic reactions" and "85% of asthma sufferers have been proved to be allergic to dust mites". We also noted Mattress Health had not supplied any information in support of the claims.  We noted an article in JACI stated "There has been great interest in and emphasis on the sensitization to aeroallergens such as house dust mite (HDM) as a risk factor in asthma.  It is generally (but not universally) agreed that effective HDM avoidance measures will improve asthma outcomes in HDM-sensitive individuals."  

We considered that because the JACI study had been carried out only on those infants who were genetically at risk of developing allergies, we had not seen evidence to show that children in general would be at a greater risk of becoming asthmatic if they were exposed to dust mites at an early age.  We also considered that although there appeared to be a link between asthma and dust mite allergies, Mattress Health had not provided substantiation to show that their cleaning service would reduce the likelihood of people developing asthma or protect against the potentially serious consequences of asthma.  We concluded that in the context of an ad for a cleaning service that claimed to eliminate allergens, the statements that linked exposure to allergens to asthma were likely to mislead.

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

Action

The ad should not reappear in its current form.  We advised Mattress Health to  

consult the CAP Copy Advice team when devising future ads.

Adjudication of the ASA Council (Non-broadcast)