ASA Adjudications

Leisure Connection Ltd t/a Harpers Fitness Ltd
Potton House
Wyboston Lakes
Great North Road
Wyboston
Bedfordshire
MK44 3BA
Number of complaints: 1
Date:2 April 2008
Media:Leaflet
Sector:Leisure

Ad
A promotion in a health club newsletter stated "If you are exercising regularly and want the best replacement fluid to keep your body balanced and healthy then it may be time to consider the benefits of 'alkaline antioxidant water'. Already used by thousands of people in the US and Asia, alkaline water helps to maintain the pH balance in your body and provides active people with the important nutrients they need. Antioxidants neutralise 'free radicals' produced during exercise, this is important as free radicals are believed to contribute to degenerative diseases and premature ageing ... Our bodies need a blood pH level of 7.36 to 7.44, but modern lifestyles and heavy consumption of meat, dairy products, coffee and sugars combined with stress create acidic residues in the body. Typical symptoms of excess acidity in our body tissues include low energy levels, excess weight, poor digestion and aches and pains. When our body fluids are properly pH balanced our cells are able to take up oxygen which promotes wellbeing and vitality. Alkalark is the simplest and most economical water pH booster available in the world today. Its handy size allows you to fill it up and take it wherever you go just like you would with a regular water bottle".

Issue
One complainant challenged whether:

1. the implied claim that the body produced more free radicals during exercise could be substantiated;

2. the implied claims that "modern lifestyles and heavy consumption of meat, dairy products, coffee and sugars" could raise the pH of one's body, and cause the "typical symptoms of excess acidity in our body tissues ... low energy levels, excess weight, poor digestion and aches and pains" stated in the ad could be substantiated; and

3. the Alkalark flask effectively alkalised water, and whether drinking that water could affect the pH level of the body, helping to counteract the "typical symptoms" listed.
The CAP Code: 3.1;7.1;50.1

Response
Harpers Fitness Ltd (Harpers) submitted a response from a consultant sports scientist who had helped to prepare the ad. A response was also submitted from Water For Health, the company who supplied the Alkalark flask.

1. The sports scientist said there was much scientific evidence concerning the increased production of free radicals during exercise. She provided a list of some of that evidence, but did not submit copies of those documents. She said exercise increased oxygen utilisation from 10 to 20 times over the resting, which greatly increased the generation of free radicals and lead to enhanced damage to muscles and other tissues.

Water for Health submitted six scientific papers, which they said confirmed the claim that exercise increased the production of free radicals, and also showed that antioxidants worked to counter that effect.

2. The sports scientist said there was a significant body of research that stated that the ingestion of various foods leaves either an acid or alkaline residue in the body. She said numerous books had been written on the subject, several of which categorised food according to their acid or alkali residue. The sports scientist submitted a list of various food groups, such as vegetables, fruits, grain products, legumes, dairy and protein, which had been categorised according to whether they were acidifying or alkalising foods.

The sports scientist quoted from one book, which stated that "the body constantly works to maintain ideal acid-base balance. When factors such as the intake of acid-producing foods makes the body chemistry more acidic, the body - from the cells to the kidneys to the skin - works quickly to compensate for this metabolic acidosis". She said a number of scientific studies had illuminated the 'biological costs' of our forced adaptation to that chronic acidosis. The sports scientist listed the problems caused by that condition, of which the primary symptoms were impaired cellular function, fatigue, diminished immunity, inflammation, osteoporosis and other problems relating to mineral loss, premature aging and accelerated muscle loss, and problems with enzyme function. The sports scientist said a detailed scientific study had shown that, due to the excessive acidic load that was being placed on the body as a result of the modern diet, the body was storing an increased amount of acids in fats, so as not to overwhelm the body's prime detoxifying organs (the liver and kidneys).

Water for Health said there was significant documentation that heavy consumption of the foods listed in the ad increased the acidity of the body tissues. They submitted copies of the books listed by the sports scientist, and highlighted the various sections of those books that detailed the effects of acidosis on the body. Water for Health said, although those books were written for the general public, they were all written by well-qualified scientists.

Water for Health also submitted scientific papers in support of the claim. They argued that those papers showed that contemporary Western diets contained a high percentage of acid producing foods, which in turn produced metabolic acidosis in otherwise healthy subjects.

3. The sports scientist said there were two prime ways to determine whether water had been effectively alkalised. One was a change in pH, and the second was the change in Oxidation Reduction Potential (ORP). She explained that, if you added typical tap water or bottled water with a pH of 7.5 to the Alkalark flask, the pH would change to between 8.5 - 9.5. She further explained that typical tap or bottled waters in the UK gave ORP readings in the range of +150 to +300 mv, but that after the water had been in the Alkalark the ORP changed to between -50 and -250 mv.

The sports scientist said there was a large body of evidence, most of which had been carried out in hospitals in Japan and Korea, which showed that drinking alkalised water had a beneficial effect in neutralising acidic residues in the body. She quoted one scientist who stated "In the case of mineral alkaline reduced water the following are observable: purification of the acidified blood, increasing of immune functions, special superiority to reduce active oxygen (free radicals) and good energy harmonising with our body".

Water For Health explained that the base of the Alkalark flask contained a cage that housed a number of special minerals. These minerals changed the characteristics of the water that was poured into the Alkalark flask, by changing its ORP and therefore making it more alkaline. They said the Alkalark flask had a CE marking and was registered as a Class 1 device in accordance with the guidelines issued by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Authority (MHRA). They submitted a copy of the CE mark and the MHRA's Bulletin No. 2 on 'The CE Mark'.

Water For Health said it was a scientific fact that if you had an acid solution and added an alkali to it, the solution would become less acidic. Water For Health said, although there was significant documented information regarding the effects of the build up of acidity in body tissues, the ad itself only implied that drinking alkalised water would assist in reducing the build up of acidity in the body. Water for Health provided research documents that they argued showed that drinking alkalised water could have a beneficial effect on the body, by helping to balance acidity and by counteracting the damaging effects of free radicals.

Assessment
1. Upheld
The ASA noted the list of scientific documents concerning the increased production of free radicals produced during exercise submitted by the sports scientist. Nevertheless, we considered that that list in itself was not enough to substantiate the claim made in the ad that "antioxidants neutralise free radicals produced during exercise". We noted that clause 50.1 of the CAP Code stated that "medical and scientific claims made about beauty and health-related products should be backed by evidence, where appropriate consisting of trials conducted on people", and we considered that the claim made in the ad represented a new, objective health claim that required a body of robust evidence, consisting of clinical trials conducted on people, to substantiate it.

We also noted the six documents submitted by Water for Health in support of the claim. We understood, however, that two of those documents were short abstracts relating to research, the full-text of which we had not seen. Three of the documents were review papers that collated and assessed the findings of other studies, and only one paper was based on the results of a trial conducted on people. We understood that the participants in that trial consisted of 12 men, between 18 and 30 years of age, who were recreational weight trainers. We noted that the test consisted of a heavy resistance exercise protocol of eight exercises performed in circuit fashion. We also understood that, in order to assess the effect of vitamin E on free radical formation, those men had been divided into two groups of six. One group was given a vitamin E supplement and the other a placebo. We acknowledged that the trial results showed that free radical formation increased with intense, heavy resistance exercise. However, we also acknowledged that the trial paper stated that two other investigations into resistance-type exercise and free radical production had reported no increase in free radical formation. We understood that one of the reasons for that discrepancy might be the type and intensity of the exercise regime carried out by the participants. We considered that the demographics of the participants selected for the trial was not representative of the general population, or of the different kinds of exercise regimes that might be undertaken within the general population. We also considered that the sample size of 12 participants was not large enough to support the more wide-ranging claim that the body produced more free radicals during exercise. We therefore concluded that the ad was likely to mislead.

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

2. Upheld
We noted the five books named by the sports scientist, and submitted as evidence by Water for Health. We also noted that the quotation given by the sports scientist that referred to acidosis was taken from one of those books, which was a dietary guide. We understood that those books presented their arguments in a popular format in order to assist interested members of the public. Whilst we did not object to that per se, we did not consider that the books themselves presented objective, scientific evidence of the type described in point one.

We acknowledged the papers provided by Water for Health in support of the claim. Two of those papers were short summaries of research that had been carried out into the influence of the contemporary diet on the acid-base balance in the human body. They did not, however, describe the methodologies or full results of that research. Three other papers discussed the health implications of the contemporary Western diet, by comparing it to the pre-agricultural diet of our hominoid ancestors over 10,000 years ago. Two other papers surveyed the effect on bone health of the acid-alkaline balance in the body. However, we considered that only one of the pieces of evidence submitted in support of the claim consisted of a trial conducted on people. We understood that that trial investigated the effect of an acidic diet on bone health, and estimated the acidic dietary intake of men and women on the basis of self-administered food-frequency and health and lifestyle questionnaires completed by the respondents.

We did not consider that we had seen a robust body of scientific evidence that demonstrated that acidosis caused the biological conditions summarised by the sports scientist, or that an excessive acidic load was placed on the body as a result of modern diets. Because of that we concluded that the claim made in the ad, that "modern lifestyles and heavy consumption of meat, dairy products, coffee and sugars ... create acidic residues in the body. Typical symptoms of excess acidity in our body tissues include low energy levels, excess weight, poor digestion and aches and pains", was misleading.

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

3. Upheld
We noted the arguments, put forward by both the sports scientist and Water For Health, that the Alkalark flask changed the pH level of ordinary tap or bottled water to a pH of between 8.5 and 9.5, although we had not seen evidence that that was the case. We acknowledged that a pH of 7 was neutral, a pH of less than 7 was acidic and a pH of greater than 7 was alkaline. We also noted that the Alkalark flask had a CE mark in accordance with MHRA guidelines. We understood that a CE mark demonstrated that a product conformed to the essential health, safety and environmental requirements set out in EU directives. Notwithstanding that, we understood that a CE mark did not allow advertisers to make any specific health or medical claims on behalf of their product.

We considered that the ad implied that the Alkalark flask alkalised water, and that because of that it could counteract the symptoms of excess acidity in the body. We also considered that that could amount to a medical claim. We noted the documents provided by Water for Health in support of the claim. We understood that some of those documents were from the website of a manufacturer of water ionisers, and consisted of testimonials, abstracts or research summaries from doctors, describing their experiences of using alkalised water in their clinical practice. We understood that another paper investigated the anti-cancer effect of alkalised water by conducting a trial on mice. We noted that the final scientific study reported the chemical changes that took place in electrolyzed-reduced (alkalised) water, although that study did not investigate the effect of drinking such water on the human body.

We considered that the evidence submitted in support of the claim was not substantial enough to prove that drinking alkalised water affected the pH level of the body, or helped to counteract the typical symptoms of excess acidity described in point two. Because we had not seen robust scientific evidence demonstrating the efficacy of the Alkalark at alkalising water, or the effects of drinking such alkalised water on the health of the body, we concluded that the ad was misleading.

On this point the ad breached CAP Code clauses 3.1 (Substantiation), 7.1 (Truthfulness) and 50.1 (Health and beauty products and therapies).
Action
We told Harpers not to repeat the ad in its current form. We advised them to contact our CAP Copy Advice team for guidance when preparing future ads for the Alkalark flask.

Adjudication of the ASA Council (Non-broadcast)

back | top