Background
Summary of Council decision:
Four issues were investigated, of which two were Upheld and two were Not upheld.
Ad description
The advertiser's own website, and their Facebook page, advertised hair extensions:
a. The advertiser's own website www.inanch.com included a number of web pages with information about the product. On a web page headed "About Great Lengths", text stated "The Great Lengths bond uses a blend of polymers that mimic the structure of hair to fuse the extensions and make the bond kinder to your scalp". On a web page headed "The Application", text stated "Cold Fusion - Gentle and desirable ... Using ultrasound technology, Cold Fusion uses virtually no heat and produces the same amazing results while offering further protection to those with finer, heat sensitive hair". A web page headed "Q & A", included text which stated "Q: Will hair extensions damage my own hair? A: The systems used at Great Lengths & Inanch are designed by experts who invest significantly in researching new technologies. The special v-shaped bond is made up of a special blend of polymers that imitate the molecular structure of human hair; thus acting as a perfect bridge between the extension and your own hair. If your extensions and the bond are maintained in the recommended way, they will not damage your own hair".
b. On the advertiser's Facebook page, a post by a member of the public stated "Can you have hair extensions if ur[sic] pregnant? I thought it was unadvisable?". In response, the advertiser posted "Hi ... yes you can BUT only if they are applied with keratin bonds, such as Great Lengths' keratin bonds, micro rings, micro wefts or clip-ins which are all safe methods. It is only 'glue-in' extensions that shouldn't be used when you are pregnant which we don't do in our salon".
Issue
Tatiana Hair Extensions challenged whether the following claims were misleading and could be substantiated:
1. "kinder to your scalp", because they understood no tests had been carried out to establish whether the Great Lengths bond was gentler on the scalp;
2. "will not damage your own hair", because they believed the hair extensions did cause damage;
3. "Cold Fusion uses virtually no heat", because they understood the process did involve the application of heat; and
4. in ad (b) that Great Lengths keratin bond extensions were safe for pregnant women to use, because they believed the use of chemicals in the bonding and removal processes meant it was not guaranteed to be safe.
Response
1. & 2. Inanch Hair Design LLP said there were many reasons why a person's scalp or hair could be damaged by wearing hair extensions of any type, including if extensions were badly applied or the extensionist failed to take into account factors such as the health, lifestyle and hair maintenance regime of the client. For those reasons, Great Lengths extensionists were required to be trained and certified by an approved Educator to ensure they could correctly apply and remove the extensions. Inanch Hair Design said all their extensionists were certified and trained to conduct a full consultation with clients prior to application of the extensions. They said they had been specialising in hair extension applications for over eight years and had never had any complaints from their clients that their application of Great Lengths extensions had caused damage to their own hair or scalp. They highlighted that the claim "will not damage your own hair" was qualified to make clear that the extensions would not damage a person's hair where the extensions and bond were maintained as recommended.
Inanch Hair Design provided a variety of documents in support of the claims in the ad. In addition to four client testimonials and an article from a magazine which described the experience of one of their clients, they provided a copy of a study, carried out at an Austrian university, which was available on the German version of Great Lengths' website. The study described and assessed the process by which Great Lengths hair extensions were attached using the 'Ultrasonic 5000' or 'Cold Fusion' system. They also provided a copy of a declaration from Great Lengths, which stated that the keratin bond used to attach the extensions to a person's hair complied with EC Regulations which controlled the use of substances considered harmful to human health in cosmetic products. Inanch Hair Design considered those documents indicated that Great Lengths hair extensions did not damage the scalp or the hair.
3. Inanch Hair Design explained there were two methods for applying Great Lengths hair extensions. The Cold Fusion method referred to in the claim used ultrasound technology to liquefy the keratin bond and attach the extension to the client's hair. That method did generate a little heat, but in comparison to the Classic Fusion method, which used heated tongs to melt the bond and so attach it to the person's own hair, the tip of the application machine did not get as hot. Inanch Hair Design said they therefore stated that Cold Fusion used "virtually no heat" rather than stating that it did not use any heat at all.
4. Inanch Hair Design said the keratin bonds were attached to the client's own hair at least one inch away from the scalp, and the extension removal solution was applied only to the bond and did not touch any part of the scalp. They said human hair was a 'dead' substance and therefore chemicals could not travel from the hair shaft through to the hair follicle to be absorbed into the body. With regard to any fumes released from the bonding or removal processes, they were substantially less than those fumes released from hair colouring or artificial nail extensions, which were deemed safe to be applied during pregnancy. Inanch Hair Design said the most important factor in relation to fumes was that a salon should have sufficient ventilation, which all their salons did. They said they did not know of any case where a pregnant woman or her child had suffered ill effects from the extensions, and that their senior hairdresser had applied the extensions to hundreds of clients, as well as having them applied to her own hair, during two healthy pregnancies.
Inanch Hair Design provided a written opinion from a consultant in pharmaceutical medicine, who specialised in the research and development of medicinal products and medical devices. The consultant noted that documentation from the manufacturer of the keratin bond confirmed that it was not classified as harmful under relevant EC Regulation, and that the bond removal solutions did not carry any specific warnings or toxicological information that the products were unsafe to use on pregnant women. The consultant also noted there were no reports in the medical literature that the use of such products was unsafe for pregnant women. They considered that the use of the extensions, if applied and removed correctly by someone trained to do so, should be safe for pregnant women to use.
Assessment
1. Upheld
The ASA noted the claim "kinder to your scalp" appeared as part of a sentence which referred to the type of bond used to attach Great Lengths hair extensions to a person's own hair. We understood there were two methods by which the bond was attached to the hair: the 'Cold Fusion' method which used ultrasound waves; and a 'Classic Fusion' or 'Classic Heat' method which used heated tongs. The claim did not specify which method it related to and so we considered consumers would understand the claim to refer to both methods. We also considered consumers would understand the claim to be a comparison with other methods of attaching hair extensions (such as other glue-type bonding methods, micro rings or clip-ins) used in high-end salons, and that the comparison related to the attachment process, the period during which the extensions were worn, the removal process, and the condition of the hair after removal. We therefore considered that to support the claim we would need to see evidence which compared the effects on the scalp of different types of hair extension bonds during attachment, wear and during and after removal.
We acknowledged that some of the client testimonials referred to negative experiences they had had with other types of hair extensions compared to Great Lengths extensions. We also acknowledged that the study concluded that the Great Lengths Cold Fusion attachment method would not damage a person's natural hair and would protect the surrounding hair and scalp. However, the study did not examine the effects that extensions attached by Cold Fusion would have on the scalp during wear or during and after removal. We also had not seen evidence relating to the attachment, wear and removal of Great Lengths extensions attached by Classic Fusion, or evidence relating to the attachment, wear and removal of other types of hair extension. In the absence of comparative substantiation to support the claim that the Great Lengths bond was kinder to the scalp than other methods of attaching hair extensions, we concluded the ad was misleading in that regard.
On this point, ad (a) breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules
3.1
3.1
Marketing communications must not materially mislead or be likely to do so.
and
3.3
3.3
Marketing communications must not mislead the consumer by omitting material information. They must not mislead by hiding material information or presenting it in an unclear, unintelligible, ambiguous or untimely manner.
Material information is information that the consumer needs to make informed decisions in relation to a product. Whether the omission or presentation of material information is likely to mislead the consumer depends on the context, the medium and, if the medium of the marketing communication is constrained by time or space, the measures that the marketer takes to make that information available to the consumer by other means.
(Misleading advertising),
3.7
3.7
Before distributing or submitting a marketing communication for publication, marketers must hold documentary evidence to prove claims that consumers are likely to regard as objective and that are capable of objective substantiation. The ASA may regard claims as misleading in the absence of adequate substantiation.
(Substantiation) and
3.11
3.11
Marketing communications must not mislead consumers by exaggerating the capability or performance of a product.
(Exaggeration).
2. Upheld
As above, the claim appeared in a paragraph which referred to the Great Lengths bond, but did not specify which of the two attachment methods (Cold or Classic Fusion) it related to. We noted the claim "they will not damage your own hair" was qualified to make clear that it was contingent upon the extensions and bond being maintained as recommended. We therefore considered consumers would interpret the claim to mean that, regardless of which attachment method was used, so long as they maintained the extensions as recommended, their own hair would not be damaged during the attachment process or the period during which they wore the hair, or during the removal process, and that their hair would be in good condition afterwards.
We acknowledged that the client testimonials reported that the hair extensions did not damage their hair, and that some stated their hair appeared healthier and thicker after the extensions were removed compared to before the extensions were attached, which they attributed to the hair-care routine associated with wearing the extensions. We considered, however, that testimonials alone were not sufficient to support the claim and that we would need to see more robust evidence. As referenced above, the study stated that the Cold Fusion attachment method did not damage hair, but it did not examine whether the extensions caused damage during wear or removal and did not relate at all to the Classic Fusion attachment method. Because we had not seen evidence that Great Lengths hair extensions (regardless of which attachment method was used and whether or not the extensions were maintained as recommended) would cause no damage to the wearer's own hair during attachment, wear or removal, we concluded the ad was misleading in that regard.
On this point, ad (a) breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules
3.1
3.1
Marketing communications must not materially mislead or be likely to do so.
and
3.3
3.3
Marketing communications must not mislead the consumer by omitting material information. They must not mislead by hiding material information or presenting it in an unclear, unintelligible, ambiguous or untimely manner.
Material information is information that the consumer needs to make informed decisions in relation to a product. Whether the omission or presentation of material information is likely to mislead the consumer depends on the context, the medium and, if the medium of the marketing communication is constrained by time or space, the measures that the marketer takes to make that information available to the consumer by other means.
(Misleading advertising),
3.7
3.7
Before distributing or submitting a marketing communication for publication, marketers must hold documentary evidence to prove claims that consumers are likely to regard as objective and that are capable of objective substantiation. The ASA may regard claims as misleading in the absence of adequate substantiation.
(Substantiation) and
3.11
3.11
Marketing communications must not mislead consumers by exaggerating the capability or performance of a product.
(Exaggeration).
3. Not upheld
The claim appeared on a web page that also described the Classic Fusion attachment method. We considered consumers would therefore understand the claim that the Cold Fusion system used "virtually no heat" to be a comparison with the Classic Fusion, heat-based system. We understood the Cold Fusion bonding system used ultrasound waves which quickly heated and liquefied the bond, and that there was, therefore, an element of heating involved. However, we noted that the study, which described the process by which the bonding worked, stated that the bond liquefied within two to three seconds, that no appreciable heating occurred to the area where the bond was located, that the rest of the hair was protected from heat, and that the machine itself did not heat up much. We considered the findings of the study therefore supported the claim "Cold Fusion uses virtually no heat" and concluded the claim was not misleading.
On this point, we investigated ad (a) under CAP Code (Edition 12) rules
3.1
3.1
Marketing communications must not materially mislead or be likely to do so.
and
3.3
3.3
Marketing communications must not mislead the consumer by omitting material information. They must not mislead by hiding material information or presenting it in an unclear, unintelligible, ambiguous or untimely manner.
Material information is information that the consumer needs to make informed decisions in relation to a product. Whether the omission or presentation of material information is likely to mislead the consumer depends on the context, the medium and, if the medium of the marketing communication is constrained by time or space, the measures that the marketer takes to make that information available to the consumer by other means.
(Misleading advertising),
3.7
3.7
Before distributing or submitting a marketing communication for publication, marketers must hold documentary evidence to prove claims that consumers are likely to regard as objective and that are capable of objective substantiation. The ASA may regard claims as misleading in the absence of adequate substantiation.
(Substantiation) and
3.11
3.11
Marketing communications must not mislead consumers by exaggerating the capability or performance of a product.
(Exaggeration), but did not find it in breach.
4. Not upheld
We understood the keratin bonds and removal solutions complied with all relevant safety regulations and carried no warnings that the products were not safe to be used on the hair ‒ or in the presence ‒ of pregnant women. We noted the consultant considered that, if applied and removed correctly, the extensions should be safe for pregnant women. We were unaware of any evidence to the contrary. We therefore concluded the ad was not misleading in that regard.
On this point, we investigated ad (b) under CAP Code (Edition 12) rules
3.1
3.1
Marketing communications must not materially mislead or be likely to do so.
and
3.3
3.3
Marketing communications must not mislead the consumer by omitting material information. They must not mislead by hiding material information or presenting it in an unclear, unintelligible, ambiguous or untimely manner.
Material information is information that the consumer needs to make informed decisions in relation to a product. Whether the omission or presentation of material information is likely to mislead the consumer depends on the context, the medium and, if the medium of the marketing communication is constrained by time or space, the measures that the marketer takes to make that information available to the consumer by other means.
(Misleading advertising),
3.7
3.7
Before distributing or submitting a marketing communication for publication, marketers must hold documentary evidence to prove claims that consumers are likely to regard as objective and that are capable of objective substantiation. The ASA may regard claims as misleading in the absence of adequate substantiation.
(Substantiation) and
3.11
3.11
Marketing communications must not mislead consumers by exaggerating the capability or performance of a product.
(Exaggeration), but did not find it in breach.
Action
Ad (a) must not appear again in its current form. We told Inanch Hair Design LLP to ensure they held adequate substantiation for their advertising claims.
