Ad description

A Facebook post for Covesca seen on 20 January 2017, advertised an Oilslick 5’5” Eggbut Single Jointed Snaffle horse bit coated in a titanium mixture, which included the text “best of all they actually help your horse to perform to their maximum potential, this is all thanks to our titanium mixture which all our Covesca bits are coated in. The benefits are to benefit the well being [sic] of your horse and ultimately provide a performance enhancing quality including but not limited to Promoting healing to help your horse repair faster, Is An Anti-Inflammatory To Your Horse, Is A Natural Pain Reliever (Drug Free), Helps To Support Suppleness, Helps To Reduce Muscle Stiffness, Helps To Increase Oxygen Supply, Helps To Increase White Blood Cells”.

Issue

The complainant challenged whether the health claims were misleading and could be substantiated.

Response

Covesca said that the claims were not misleading and provided two documents that described the health benefits of titanium and gold. They also sent two articles from websites; one describing the health benefits of humans wearing titanium bracelets and the other detailing the health benefits and metaphysical properties of titanium. They also provided a journal article which looked at the response of bacteria and primary human fibroblasts to the antibacterial nanoarrays fabricated on titanium surfaces using a hydrothermal etching process.

Assessment

Upheld

The ASA considered that the claims made in the text of the ad would be understood by consumers to mean that the Oilslick 5’5” Eggbut Single Jointed Snaffle horse bit was effective in delivering the “performance enhancing” qualities listed in the ad by treating the various symptoms listed, and that they therefore required substantiation, including trials of the device on horses.

We noted that the documents and articles provided by the advertiser which described the health benefits of titanium and gold contained no references to any sources of information and did not relate to the advertised product or to horses. Further, the journal article did not examine any of the claims made in the ad and was therefore not relevant in substantiating the claim. For those reasons, we considered that the evidence provided was not sufficient to substantiate the claims made and we therefore concluded that the ad was misleading.

The ad breached CAP Code (Edition 12)  3.1 3.1 Marketing communications must not materially mislead or be likely to do so.  (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  12.1 12.1 Objective claims must be backed by evidence, if relevant consisting of trials conducted on people. Substantiation will be assessed on the basis of the available scientific knowledge.
Medicinal or medical claims and indications may be made for a medicinal product that is licensed by the MHRA, VMD or under the auspices of the EMA, or for a CE-marked medical device. A medicinal claim is a claim that a product or its constituent(s) can be used with a view to making a medical diagnosis or can treat or prevent disease, including an injury, ailment or adverse condition, whether of body or mind, in human beings.
Secondary medicinal claims made for cosmetic products as defined in the appropriate European legislation must be backed by evidence. These are limited to any preventative action of the product and may not include claims to treat disease.
 (Medicines, medical devices, health-related products and beauty products).

Action

The ad must not appear again in its current form. We told Covesca not to make any claims about the health benefits of their products unless they held adequate documentary evidence to substantiate them.

CAP Code (Edition 12)

12.1     3.1     3.7    


More on