Rulings (76)
  • 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...

  • 222 Collective Group Ltd t/a 222collectiveuk

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad), Website (own site)
    • 25 March 2026

    A paid-for Facebook and Instagram ad for a food supplement brand made claims that their supplements could prevent, treat or cure the symptoms of the menopause and Pre-Menstrual Syndrome (PMS).

  • Kaocommerce Ltd t/a Lunera

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 25 March 2026

    Two paid-for Meta ads for a food supplement brand made claims that their supplements could prevent, treat or cure symptoms of the menopause and inflammation. The ad also made unauthorised health claims.

  • Minerva Wellness Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad), Website (own site)
    • 25 March 2026

    A paid-for Facebook ad and website for a supplement brand misleadingly implied their food supplements could prevent, treat or cure symptoms of the menopause. The ad also made unauthorised specific health claims.

  • Nova Relief t/a Nova Menopause Vitality

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 25 March 2026

    Two paid-for Facebook ads for a food supplement company misleadingly implied their food supplements could prevent, treat or cure symptoms of the menopause. The ad also made unauthorised specific health claims.

  • Polybiotics Ltd t/a Polybiotics

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad), Website (own site)
    • 25 March 2026

    A paid-for Facebook and Instagram ad and a website for a food supplement brand misleading implied their food supplements could prevent, cure or treat Polycystic Ovarian Syndrome (PCOS). The ad also made unauthorised specific health claims and made health claims that referred to the recommendation of an individual healt...

  • Grind Coffee Roasters Ltd t/a Grind

    • Upheld
    • Website (own site)
    • 18 March 2026

    An ad on Grind’s own website for its coffee pods failed to make the basis of a price comparison clear and misrepresented their competitor product’s end-of-life arrangements.

  • Humantra UK Operations Ltd t/a Humantra

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 18 March 2026

    A paid-for Facebook ad for electrolyte sachets broke rules prohibit claims that state or imply a food can prevent, treat or cure human disease. 

  • ZOE Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 11 March 2026

    [Republished ruling] A paid-for Facebook ad misleadingly claimed that a supplement didn’t contain any ultra-processed ingredients. 

  • Wild Nutrition Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Poster
    • 04 March 2026

    A poster for a supplement company misleadingly claimed their ingredients came from food or natural sources.

  • persons unknown t/a Evora Official

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 25 February 2026

    Four paid-for Facebook ads and a website for a multi-sensory stuffed toy made unlicenced medicinal claims that weren’t backed up by robust evidence, including that the product could relieve symptoms of anxiety and insomnia. The ads also made misleading claims about testimonials and didn’t have evidence to s...

  • Health Bridge Ltd t/a Zava

    • Upheld
    • Social media (influencer or affiliate ad)
    • 11 February 2026

    An Instagram post, TikTok video and a Facebook post for weight-loss injections promoted prescription-only medicines to the public, against the law and our rules.

  • MedExpress Enterprises Ltd t/a MedExpress

    • Upheld
    • Social media (influencer or affiliate ad)
    • 11 February 2026

    Three Instagram posts and a TikTok video for weight-loss injections promoted prescription-only medicines to the public, against the law and our rules.

  • Menwell Ltd t/a Voy

    • Upheld
    • Social media (influencer or affiliate ad)
    • 11 February 2026

    Four Instagram ads for weight-loss injections promoted prescription-only medicines to the public, against the law and our rules.

  • UK Meds Direct Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Social media (influencer or affiliate ad)
    • 11 February 2026

    Two TikTok ads for weight-loss injections promoted prescription-only medicines to the public, against the law and our rules.

  • Kind Patches Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 04 February 2026

    Four paid-for Facebook ads for a supplement company misleadingly implied their products had health benefits without having suitable evidence to back these claims up.

  • Mamedica Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Website (own site)
    • 28 January 2026

    A website for a medical cannabis clinic made misleading price comparison claims, failed to make the basis of comparisons with competitors clear and didn’t ensure that people would be able to verify comparative claims.