Note: This advice is given by the CAP Executive about non-broadcast advertising. It does not constitute legal advice. It does not bind CAP, CAP advisory panels or the Advertising Standards Authority.
Conditions for which medical supervision should be sought
Ads for adjustable beds or chairs are often targeted at sufferers of conditions such as arthritis, rheumatism and bronchitis. Rule 12.2 of the CAP Code prohibits marketers from discouraging essential treatment for conditions for which medical supervision should be sought. This CAP Guidance explains the position in more detail and includes a non-exhaustive list of medical conditions that are likely to be caught by the Code rule. In the context of ads for adjustable beds and chairs, references to serious conditions could potentially have the effect of discouraging consumers from seeking help from a qualified practitioner.
CAP has previously accepted that a well-supported posture might provide temporary pain relief to some conditions. So, in certain circumstances it may be acceptable for marketers to claim that products that support a good posture can offer positional, temporary relief or comfort to sufferers of conditions, providing that robust evidence is held. But marketers should not imply that the product treats a condition, or that the relief or comfort is any more than temporary.
In July 2005, the ASA ruled against a leaflet advertising a range of physiotherapy products including chairs and beds. It claimed the products were “ideal for sufferers from Arthritis, High Blood Pressure and Back Pain … You can actually feel the aches and pains easing by the moment …”. The ASA took advice from an expert, who believed the advertiser’s evidence fell short of demonstrating the efficacy of the products (Niagara Therapy (UK) Ltd, 20 July 2005).
In 2009 the ASA received a complaint about a brochure for reclining chairs which made claims including “A Willowbrook recliner chair should be experienced by sufferers of: Stress and tension; Arthritic pain; Aches and pains; Back pain; Mobility problems & many other conditions”. It also featured a number of testimonials from sufferers of such conditions. The advertiser explained that they did not claim to treat those conditions, but merely recommended that sufferers experience the chair. Regardless, the ASA considered that the claims went beyond suggesting that the products could provide temporary positional relief of aches and, in the absence of evidence to support those claims, considered the ad misleading (Willowbrook Ltd, 19 August 2009).
Similarly, the ASA upheld complaints about claims on an advertiser’s website in relation to its massage furniture which included “The benefits massage may bring you...Improved circulation...Improved blood supply to muscles boosting energy flow, May improve the rate at which the body recovers from injury or illness, Stimulates skin and nervous system whilst relaxing the nerves and boosting the immune system...Can lessen inflammation and swelling in joints by eliminating harmful deposits...". Because the ASA was not presented with sufficient evidence to support the efficacy claims in the ad, they concluded the brochure was misleading (Dreamwell Ltd, 4 April 2012).
Claims that massage furniture can temporarily relieve symptoms of minor conditions might potentially be acceptable if supported by robust evidence. But implying that vibrations or heat from such products can treat serious medical conditions is unlikely to be acceptable (Rules 3.7, 12.1).
Marketers should ensure that they distinguish between the benefits of the vibrating or massaging action of their product, and those that can be attributed to the positional action of their bed or chair. CAP understands that some evidence suggests benefits for local vibration treatment on direct cutaneous stimulation for pain experimentally induced in a specific part of the body, especially in healthy subjects. Neither the ASA nor CAP accepts that the treatment provided by vibrating or heated products can benefit sufferers of conditions such as arthritis.
Medical devices
CAP Code rule 12.1 states that 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 medical device with the applicable conformity marking. 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 in human beings.
If an ad includes medical or medicinal claims for a product(s), the ASA and CAP are likely to expect the marketer to demonstrate that an appropriate conformity marking is held, in line with expectations for medical devices. So, marketers should keep in mind that medicinal claims relating to adjustable chairs and beds are likely to breach the CAP Code unless the advertised product is licensed appropriately as a medical device.
Marketers also need to ensure that they hold robust evidence for medical or non-medical efficacy claims. The CAP Guidance on Substantiation for health, beauty and slimming claims sets out the types and levels of evidence that marketers will likely need to hold to support efficacy claims for medical devices.
See also: ‘Health: Therapies (General)’, ‘Health: Medical Devices’ and ‘Substantiation’.