Rulings (31)
  • Lyma Life Ltd

    • Upheld
    • VOD
    • 22 September 2021

    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

    • Upheld
    • Magazine
    • 15 September 2021

    We banned an ad for a medical device claiming over misleading efficacy claims around pain relief.

  • Global EMF Solutions Ltd t/a energyDots

    • Upheld
    • Internet (website content)
    • 08 September 2021

    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. 

  • Shop TJC Ltd t/a TJC Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Television
    • 18 August 2021

    We banned an ad for a USB car air purifier over implications that it could stop COVID-19.

  • Freudenberg Household Products LP t/a Vileda

    • Upheld
    • Email
    • 11 August 2021

    An email from an industry news outlet was banned for implying that their microfibre cloth could remove Covid-19 with a high level of efficacy without having sufficient evidence to substantiate the claim.

  • John Mills Ltd t/a JML Direct

    • Upheld
    • Television
    • 04 August 2021

    An ad for a Whole-Body Vibration device was banned for unsubstantiated medical claims.

  • Cignpost Diagnostics Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Newspaper
    • 21 July 2021

    A newspaper ad for a PCR testing programme was banned for promoting behaviour that contradicted government advice on social distancing.

  • 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. 

  • Evaq Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Website (own site)
    • 30 June 2021

    A website ad for facemasks was banned for misleadingly stating that the masks could kill Covid-19.

  • 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.