Rulings (25)
  • Actegy Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Television
    • 14 July 2021

    A newspaper ad for an Aerosure device was banned for misleadingly stating that it was clinically proven to reduce coughing and a tight chest associated with a shortness of breath.

  • Pruvit Ventures Inc

    • Upheld
    • Website (own site), Social media (own site), Social media (influencer or affiliate ad)
    • 07 July 2021

    A website post, five Instagram posts and an Instagram Highlights reel for a health company were banned for making unauthorised health claims and for implying that food supplements could treat diseases. 

  • Go-Vi Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Internet (website content)
    • 23 June 2021

    A website ad for an air and surface purifier was banned for stating it could destroy Covid-19 without holding sufficient evidence to substantiate the claim.

  • YORKTEST LABORATORIES LTD

    • Upheld
    • Television, Internet (website content)
    • 23 June 2021

    A TV ad and a website post for a nutritional, dietary programme was banned for implying that the testing for the programme could help to alleviate symptoms of migraines or depression.

  • Anthony Grant t/a Resonator.uk

    • Upheld
    • Internet (website content), Social media (own site)
    • 09 June 2021

    A website and Facebook ad for an electronic bio-resonance machine was banned for stating that it was an effective alternative to vaccination against COVID-19.

  • Homeopathy UK

    • Upheld
    • Internet (website content)
    • 19 May 2021

    A website ad for a homeopathy company was banned for discouraging essential treatment for conditions for which medical supervision should be sought. 

  • JST Nutrition Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Social media (influencer or affiliate ad)
    • 19 May 2021

    Seven posts on Jodie Marsh's Instagram account, promoting a food supplement retailer, were banned for making specific health claims which were not were authorised on the GB Register and for not ensuring that the posts were obviously identifiable as ads.

  • Red Light Therapy Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Search (paid), Internet (website content)
    • 19 May 2021

    A website post and a paid-for Google ad promoting red light therapy were banned for discouraging essential treatment for which medical supervision should be sought.

  • Blood and Medical Services Ltd t/a Vivo Clinic Shop

    • Upheld
    • Internet (website content)
    • 05 May 2021

    A website ad for a health clinic was banned for making misleading claims about the speed at which they could provide the results for Covid-19 tests.

  • Homeopathy UK

    • Upheld
    • Internet (website content)
    • 05 May 2021

    A website ad for a homeopathy clinic was banned for discouraging essential treatment for conditions for which medical supervision should be sought.

  • Jetsun Sunbeds

    • Upheld
    • Internet (social networking)
    • 07 April 2021

    A Facebook post promoting sunbeds misleadingly and irresponsibly claimed that health benefits were obtained from the use of sunbeds.

  • HiSmile Pty Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Internet (social networking)
    • 17 February 2021

    A Snapchat story and a Facebook post promoting a teeth whitening company’s product were banned for misleadingly claiming their product had been clinically proven and for exaggerating its potential effects.

  • The Detox Clinic Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Internet (on own site)
    • 10 February 2021

    A website ad for a health clinic was banned for misleadingly stating that ozone therapy could successfully treat Covid-19 and for stating that colon hydrotherapy could treat IBS without holding sufficient evidence to support the claim.

  • GHN Merchant Services Ltd t/a Good Health Naturally

    • Upheld
    • Internet (website content)
    • 03 February 2021

    Three website posts promoting products which claimed to provide protection from electromagnet radiation were banned for not holding substantial evidence to support the claims.

  • Ryanair DAC

    • Upheld in part
    • Television
    • 03 February 2021

    Two TV ads for Ryanair were banned for misleading viewers about the impact vaccines would have on their ability to travel abroad during Easter and summer. We also upheld complaints on the grounds of social responsibility.

  • LARQ

    • Upheld
    • Social media (own site)
    • 27 January 2021

    A paid-for Facebook post by a water bottle retailer was banned for implying that a bottle could kill all bacteria and viruses without holding substantial evidence to support the claim.

  • Microlyscs LLC t/a The Crazy Cap

    • Upheld
    • Social media (own site)
    • 20 January 2021

    A Facebook post promoting a bottle cap was banned for implying that it could kill all bacteria, viruses and pathogens without holding evidence to substantiate the claim.

  • Manuka Doctor (UK) Ltd

    • Upheld
    • National newspaper (ad feature)
    • 06 January 2021

    A newspaper ad for a brand of honey was banned for implying that it could be used as a treatment for coughs and for implying that its “anti-microbial” properties could treat diseases.

  • Easylife Group Ltd t/a Easylife Group, Positive Health

    • Upheld
    • 02 December 2020

    A brochure ad for a skin product was banned for implying that it was effective at removing the appearance of wrinkles and removing skin tags, without adequate evidence.

  • Easylife Group Ltd t/a Easylife Group, Positive Health

    • Upheld
    • Newspaper
    • 11 November 2020

    An ad in a national newspaper made misleading and unsubstantiated claims that a reusable face mask would protect the wearer from COVID-19 and that copper-infused fibres in the mask would kill particles of COVID-19.