ASA Adjudication on Direct Beauty Products Ltd

Ad

A national press ad for silk pillowcases promised a number of health and beauty benefits. It was headlined “The NEW Anti-Aging Pillowcase?” Text stated “These 100% pure silk pillowcases have three irresistible beauty & health benefits” and listed them “1. Beautiful skin. It is estimated that after sun damage, the biggest cause of ageing is from sleeping on cotton, linen, or polyester pillowcases. They wick away moisture from your skin … Silk proactively helps to retain moisture and minimise wrinkling”, “Beautiful hair. Silk is made up from strings of amino acids, the same ph [sic] as your skin. These proteins will prevent 'bed hair', frizz and split ends. You will see and feel the difference the first morning!”, “3. Repel mites. SilkPerfect's luxury silk pillowcases are repellent to hundreds of house mites that commonly live in your bedding: they will actually move away from your face. Silk's hypoallergenic properties have also proven to ease conditions such as eczema and asthma”.

Issue

The complainant challenged whether the following claims were misleading and could be substantiated:

1. "It is estimated that after sun damage, the biggest cause of ageing is from sleeping on cotton, linen, or polyester pillowcases";

2. "Silk is made up from strings of amino acids, the same ph [sic] as your skin. These proteins will prevent "bed hair", frizz and split ends";

3. "SilkPerfect's luxury silk pillowcases are repellent to ... house mites ... they will actually move away from your face", because he did not believe mites would move away from bedding because of the pillow cases; and

4. "Silk's hypoallergenic properties have also proven to ease conditions such as eczema and asthma".

5. The ASA challenged whether the claim "silk proactively helps to retain moisture and minimise wrinkling" could be substantiated.

CAP Code (Edition 11)

Response

1. Direct Beauty Products Ltd provided their response though UK Advertising & Marketing Services plc (UKAMS). UKAMS stated that the American Academy of Dermatology had identified five intrinsic causes of skin ageing: intrinsic ageing (loss of fats, muscle tone and structure); sleep lines; photo (sun) damage; gravity; and expression lines. They stated that impact on the biological and physical constraints (gravity, intrinsic aging and expression lines) was difficult to achieve, but proactive impact on sun damage, with sunscreen, and sleep-line damage was possible. They provided quotes from several dermatology articles and research, which looked at the effect of sleeping positions and pillow contact on sleep lines and wrinkles and anecdotal advice which indicated that silk pillow cases could reduce sleep lines.

2. They said it was widely recognised that the skins pH was slightly acidic (4-6) and a near neutral balanced pH of 7 would not harm skin. They said that the natural silk spinning process resulted in a pH which was balanced with human skin pH and there had been studies which showed that the silk protein sericin could have positive benefits to hair. They referred to articles in dermatology and nursing journals and a patent which they felt supported the claim.

3. They stated that the product exceeded the requirements of the British Allergy Foundation Seal of Approval and repelled allergens. They said the pillowcases had a pore size of less than 10 microns and mites were 200-300 microns in size and their droppings were 10-24 microns in size. They also referred to articles and a US patent application which they felt supported the claim.

4. They referred to a study which had concluded that "the use of special silk clothes may be useful in the management of eczema in children" and a journal article which outlined that a cotton pyjama fabric might be preferable to polyester and referred to research which indicated that silk was preferable to cotton. They also stated that house mite control could also decrease symptoms.

5. They provided information about a study concerning the moisturising effect of sericin, which concluded that it could become a promising and important ingredient in moisturising formulations, and an article which indicated that silk was preferable to cotton as nightwear for those with dry skin concerns.

Assessment

1. Upheld

The ASA noted that the claim related to the "biggest cause of ageing", listed as sun damage followed by sleeping on cotton, linen, or polyester pillowcases, but that the advertisers had not provided any comparative evidence outlining the different causes of ageing and their comparative effects on skin. We noted that much of the evidence provided was anecdotal and that the advertiser had provided quotes from studies, but that we had not seen the studies themselves. We noted that the studies looked at how sleeping positions and pillow contact might have an effect on sleep lines and wrinkles, and although some studies indicated that silk might be preferable to cotton to avoid sleep lines, we had not seen any studies which had sufficiently tested the effects of the silk pillows and connected it to the causes of ageing.

Because we had not seen comparative evidence on the causes of ageing or sufficient scientific research to support the claim "after sun damage, the biggest cause of ageing is from sleeping on cotton, linen, or polyester pillowcases", we concluded that the ad was misleading.

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

2. Upheld

We noted that the evidence provided consisted of a filed patent, articles and anecdotal recommendations from journals. We noted that we had not seen any tests carried out which showed the effects of the product on hair and considered the claims relating to the silk proteins abilities to prevent bed hair, frizz and split ends should be supported by a body of evidence published in peer-reviewed scientific journals. Because we had not seen that evidence, we concluded that the ad was misleading.

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

3. Upheld

We noted that the evidence provided consisted of a patent application, a quote from an article and information about pore size, but did not include any research which demonstrated that the product repelled house mites or that it encouraged mites to move away from human skin. Because of that, we considered we had not sufficient evidence to support the claim in the ad and concluded that the ad was misleading.

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

4. Upheld

We noted that the study and article quoted had looked at the effects of silk clothes worn at night and although they suggested that silk pyjamas might have a positive effect on dry skin, we considered the evidence was not conclusive. Because of this, and because the evidence relating to asthma was not supported by a study showing the effects of silk on that condition, we considered that the evidence provided was not sufficient to support the claim that silk could ease conditions such as eczema and asthma.

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

5. Upheld

We noted that the study provided concluded that sericin might be used in future moisturising formulations, however, we did not consider that we had seen any evidence that related the results of that study to the product itself, nor its effects on retaining moisture or minimising wrinkling. We therefore concluded that the ad was misleading.

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

Action

The ad must not appear again in its current form.

Adjudication of the ASA Council (Non-broadcast)