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.
Beauty supplements have increased in popularity in the last few years. However, beauty and cosmetic marketers are often not aware that the claims they make for their beauty supplements might be classed as “health claims” for food, and the food rules in the UK are complex and heavily based in legislation. Any marketer looking to market food supplements should in the first instance be familiar with the landscape, and, as the rules are based in legislation, obtaining legal advice is recommended.
Health and Nutrition claims
Marketers promoting a food (or drink) or food supplements, should take the Food Rules into account and note that a claim which directly results in an effect on one’s health is likely to fall under Section 15 of the Code.
Article 2 of Regulation (EC) 1924/2006 on Nutrition and Health claims made for Foods, defines a health claim as “any claim that states, suggests or implies that a relationship exists between a food category, a food or one of its constituents and health..."
A health claim for a food should only be made if the claim is "authorised" and listed on the GB Register of nutrition and health claims (15.1). The requirements of the regulation are very strict in terms of the permissible wording of health claims. Health claims must be presented clearly and without exaggeration. The ASA is likely to investigate a complaint about a stated health claim which does not have the same meaning as an authorised claim which is listed on the GB Register. Furthermore, a product should be marketed in accordance with the conditions of use for that specific claim. There may be some exceptions to this, but in this instance, marketers should seek legal advice.
Similarly, nutrition claims are only permitted if they are listed in the UK Annex of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006. Ads must conform with the conditions set out in that Annex.
See also Food: Health Claims.
Appearance and beauty claims
If marketers are unsure about whether a claim which relates to food and one’s appearance would be considered a health claim for the purposes of Section 15 of the Code, or whether the claim will be considered purely cosmetic, they should contact the Copy Advice team, because the interpretation of such a claim will depend on the specific claims made and the overall context of the ad.
Claims not caught by the Food rules still need to be supported by scientific evidence. Rule 12.1 states that substantiation will be assessed on the basis of the available scientific knowledge. Although it states that marketers should provide trials conducted on people only “if relevant”, CAP’s experience is that efficacy claims for beauty products need to be supported by clinical trials conducted on people.
In 2023, the ASA investigated a Facebook ad for Kollo Premium Liquid Collagen. The ad included a number of cosmetic claims, including “help maintain the elasticity and firmness of your skin”, “reduce the appearance of fine lines and wrinkles” and “thicker hair”, along with various health claims, including “your skin being more hydrated”, “stronger nails” and “improved joint health". In terms of evidence for the cosmetic claims, the ASA found the evidence insufficient for multiple reasons, including that the participants were not representative of the general population and the dosage used in the trials was not the product dosage. For the health claims, the advertiser had been unaware of the requirements in the sector and none of the claims were authorised. All of the claims were therefore considered a breach of the Code (Kollo Health Ltd, 22 November 2023).
In another ruling, the ASA investigated an ad for Imedeen skincare tablets, which stated “[worked] from within to help reduce the appearance of fine lines and wrinkles”, the ASA considered the ad in context and concluded that the claim was likely to be seen as a cosmetic claim rather than a health claim. However, as a cosmetic claim, it would still need to be supported with suitable evidence proving the efficacy of the product; in this instance, the advertiser’s evidence was not considered sufficient.
There were a number of issues with the evidence, reported by the expert used in this case. They included the fact that a number of studies did not involve study protocols that included a non-active control or placebo throughout the whole trial period, or up to the period where statistically significant changes had been reported. The studies did not use methods to assess direct measures of wrinkles before or after treatment. They also involved a high component of post-menopausal women (known to show different cutaneous symptoms to pre-menopausal women) and it was considered that readers would infer from the ad, which included a picture of a 43-year-old woman, that this was the target group for the advertised product. The ASA understood that the majority of women in this age group would be pre-menopausal and therefore not representative of the age group in the studies (Pfizer Ltd, 11 June 2014).
Marketers of beauty products who are looking to make cosmetic claims are encouraged to read our Guidance on the level of substantiation expected in health, beauty and slimming claims - but are also reminded if the claim would be considered a health or nutrition claim (as opposed to a cosmetic claim), then any evidence is irrelevant if the claim is not listed on the GB Register.
Organic
Marketers should not claim that a food is “organic” or is “made with organic ingredients” unless it comes from farmers, processors or importers who: follow the minimum standards set down in Council Regulation (EC) 834/2007; are registered with an approved certification body; and are subject to regular inspections (Lean Muscle X, 21 August 2013). See also: Organic Foods.
See Food: General Health Claims, Food: Health Claims, Beauty and Cosmetic: General, Beauty: Physiological Effects