-
Tomwill (Holdings) Ltd
Six ads promoting a strategy for treating anxiety were banned for not holding evidence to support the claims and for discouraging essential treatment for conditions for which medical advice should be sought.
-
Copper Clothing Ltd t/a Copper Clothing
A radio ad for a facemask was banned for misleadingly implying that it could rapidly de-activate COVID-19 particles.
-
Gemporia Ltd
A teleshopping presentation for CBD Oils was banned for misleadingly implying that the food supplements could prevent, treat or cure human disease.
-
Lyma Life Ltd
A pre-roll YouTube ad for a food supplement was banned for misleadingly claiming that it could reduce anxiety, stress, and treat other general and specific health issues.
-
Cheshire Health & Medical Professionals LLP
We banned an ad for a medical device claiming over misleading efficacy claims around pain relief.
-
Global EMF Solutions Ltd t/a energyDots
A website ad for a device which retunes electromagnetic frequencies was banned for misleadingly stating that the device can help users feel energised, more focused and less stressed.
-
Actegy Ltd
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
A website ad for a homeopathy clinic was banned for discouraging essential treatment for conditions for which medical supervision should be sought.
-
Jetsun Sunbeds
A Facebook post promoting sunbeds misleadingly and irresponsibly claimed that health benefits were obtained from the use of sunbeds.
-
HiSmile Pty Ltd
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
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
Three website posts promoting products which claimed to provide protection from electromagnet radiation were banned for not holding substantial evidence to support the claims.
Rulings
Our rulings are published every Wednesday and set out on the public record how, following investigation, the advertising rules apply and where we draw the line in judging whether an ad has broken the rules. We also publish a list of companies and organisations which, following receipt of a complaint, agreed to amend or withdraw their ad without the need for a formal investigation.
Rulings (26)