Rulings (61)
  • Kind Patches Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 15 July 2026

    A paid-for Facebook ad for a supplement company made claims that a supplement patch could help with weight-loss and made medicinal claims for products that weren’t authorised by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA). The ad was also socially irresponsible and incl...

  • Phlo Technologies Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 15 July 2026

    A paid-for Facebook ad promoted weight-loss prescription-only medicines to the public, against the law and our rules. 

  • Express Healthcare Ltd t/a pharmacyonline.co.uk

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 24 June 2026

    A paid-for Meta ad and website for an online pharmacy promoted prescription-only medicines to the public, against the law and our rules. 

  • BetterYou Ltd t/a Better You

    • Upheld
    • Magazine (paid ad)
    • 17 June 2026

    A magazine ad for a supplement company made misleading claims that their product delivered vitamin D “quickly” and enabled fast absorption of vitamin D into the body. 

  • HealthTracker Apps t/a Blood Pressure Monitor App

    • Upheld
    • App (paid ad)
    • 17 June 2026

    Two paid-for in-app ads for a health app made medical claims for a product that wasn’t registered as a medical device and misleadingly implied that their app could monitor blood pressure and heart rate.

  • Hume Health LLC t/a HumeHealth

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 17 June 2026

    Three paid-for YouTube ads and a paid-for Facebook ad for Hume Health made medical claims for products that weren’t registered as medical devices, discouraged essential treatment for conditions for which medical supervision should be sought and exaggerated the capabilities of their products.

  • Novabeyond Ltd t/a Blood Pressure-Monitor Tracker App

    • Upheld
    • Search (paid)
    • 17 June 2026

    An in-app ad and a paid-for Google ad for a health app made medical claims for a product that wasn’t registered as a medical device and made misleading claims that their product could monitor blood pressure.

  • P&L Studio t/a Blood Pressure

    • Upheld
    • App (paid ad)
    • 17 June 2026

    A paid-for in-app ad for a health app misleadingly implied that it could monitor blood pressure and heart rate.

  • Beauty Pie Ltd t/a Beauty Pie Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Poster
    • 10 June 2026

    A poster for an LED face mask made misleading claims that it was clinically proven to reduce wrinkles in 4 weeks.

  • Menwell Ltd t/a Voy

    • Upheld
    • Email
    • 27 May 2026

    Three emails for an online pharmacy promoted prescription-only medicines to the public against the law and our rules. The ads were also socially irresponsible by creating an undue sense of urgency for people who were considering medicated weight-loss programmes. 

  • 111 Skin Ltd t/a 111skin

    • Upheld
    • Website (own site)
    • 13 May 2026

    A product listing for a skincare product misleadingly exaggerated the effects of a cosmetic product for ageing skin.

  • GLP-1 Pro Ltd t/a GuLP-1

    • Upheld
    • 06 May 2026

    Two webpages for a food supplement company made claims that a supplement could prevent, treat or cure human disease and made unauthorised health and medicinal claims. The ads also compared the effects of a food supplement to those associated with weight-loss prescr...

  • Medilife Clinic Enfield

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 06 May 2026

    A paid-for Instagram ad for a health clinic made claims that their treatments could alleviate or treat the traits of autism without suitable evidence to support these claims. The ad also discouraged essential treatment for conditions for which medical supervision should be sought. 

  • Beiersdorf UK Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Poster
    • 29 April 2026

    A poster ad for Eucerin Skincare misleadingly claimed that a serum was clinically proven to make you look up to 5 years younger.

  • Global Health Tests Ltd t/a Check My Body Health

    • Upheld
    • Website (own site)
    • 22 April 2026

    A website for a Bioresonance hair test misleadingly claimed that the test could comprehensively analyse body intolerances.

  • L'OrĂ©al (UK) Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Video on demand
    • 22 April 2026

    A Video-On-Demand ad for a serum made misleading claims that it was clinically proven to reduce hyperpigmentation in two weeks.

  • Juniper Technologies UK Ltd t/a Juniper

    • Upheld
    • Social media (influencer or affiliate ad)
    • 08 April 2026

    Posts in weight-loss support groups on Facebook didn't make clear they were paid for by the advertiser and they promoted prescription-only medicines to the public, which is against the law and our rules.

  • Juniper Technologies UK Ltd t/a Juniper

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad), Website (own site)
    • 08 April 2026

    A paid-for Facebook ad for an online pharmacy was socially irresponsible and likely to cause harm or serious and widespread offence by exploiting new mothers’ insecurities about body image and perpetuating pressure for them to conform to body image stereotypes. They also promoted prescription-only medicines to th...

  • Juniper Technologies UK Ltd t/a Juniper

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 08 April 2026

    Two paid-for Instagram ads for an online pharmacy promoted prescription-only medicines to the public, which is against the law and our rules. They also created an undue sense of urgency for members of the public who are considering medicated weight-loss programmes.

  • Persons unknown t/a Cloud Nine

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 01 April 2026

    A paid-for Facebook ad for a clothing company made medical claims for a product that didn’t have the relevant compliance labels and wasn’t registered with the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency. The ad also discouraged essential treatment for a condition for which medical supervision should...