Background
This ruling forms part of a wider piece of work on misleadingness and irresponsibility in ads for tanning products. The ads were identified for investigation following intelligence gathered by our Active Ad Monitoring system, which uses AI to proactively search for online ads that might break the rules. See also related rulings published on 21 January 2026.
Ad description
A paid-for Facebook ad for Shine Brown oil, a tanning accelerator, seen in May 2025. The ad featured a caption which stated, “Dark tan is dangerous. But here is how to get it without the dangerous part! Here is how to get deep dark tan without excessive exposure: Apply SPF". When the ad was clicked on the caption continued, “Tan for 15 minutes at a time max. Use tanning creams to boost tanning effects. Enjoy deep dark tan quickly and safely. For more tanning tips or ordering the safest tanning cream click below https://www.byrokko.com/products/shine-brown-chocolate”. The ad featured a video of a person applying the product while on a sunbed.
Issue
The ASA challenged whether the claims “[…] here is how to get it without the dangerous part!”, “Enjoy deep dark tan quickly and safely” and “safest tanning cream” were misleading and irresponsible.
Response
Byrokko said the purpose of the ad was not to suggest that tanning was “healthy” or to make any medical or therapeutic claims. They said the ad was educational and was meant to guide consumers towards limiting sun or sunbed exposure and to promote cosmetic tanning alternatives that reduced reliance on potentially harmful tanning methods. They said some of their best-selling products were “fake tan” oils and creams, which allowed consumers to achieve the appearance of a natural tan without any ultraviolet (UV) or sunbed exposure.
They clarified that the phrase “without the dangerous part” was not intended to suggest that tanning could be made medically safe, but rather to highlight that Byrokko products could help achieve the appearance of a fake tan. The ad also included guidance to apply sun protection factor (SPF) and limit tanning sessions to 15 minutes, which reinforced a message of moderation and responsible behaviour.
They said references to “SPF” in the ad were not referring to the Shine Brown cream itself, but to a general recommendation that consumers should use a separate SPF product for protection during any UV exposure. That distinction was clearly stated on their website, where the following disclaimer appeared on all relevant product pages, “This product does not provide UV protection. We don’t recommend you use this product on children or people with sensitive skin. For people with very light skin, we recommend using SPF before applying Shine Brown cream. Not for consumption! Avoid direct sun exposure between 11 a.m. and 4 p.m.”.
They acknowledged that the phrasing in the ad could have been interpreted as implying that tanning with sunbeds could be “safer”, which was not their intention, and they understood that did not align with NHS advice. They said they would refrain from using any similar language that could suggest health or safety connotations in future ads.
Assessment
Upheld
The ad featured the claims, “Dark tan is dangerous. But here is how to get it without the dangerous part!”, “Enjoy deep dark tan quickly and safely” and “safest tanning cream”. The ad also featured the product being applied during sunbed use.
The ASA acknowledged Byrokko’s comment that they intended the ad to guide consumers towards limiting sun or sunbed exposure. However, we considered consumers would likely understand from the claims in the ad that using the product during sunbed use was a quick and safe way to achieve a deep dark tan without the health risks associated with tanning, such as skin damage or an increased risk of skin cancer.
We took into consideration the NHS’s position regarding the use of sunbeds, which was characterised by a high degree of caution. The NHS website stated that there was no safe or healthy way to get a tan through exposure to UV rays and that using sunbeds could increase the risk of skin cancer. It further stated that exposure to UV rays was the number one cause of skin cancer in the UK, that included melanoma, which was the most dangerous type of skin cancer. The website also listed the health risks associated with sunbeds, which included skin cancer, premature skin ageing and sunburn. The website finally linked to the Cancer Research UK website which said that melanoma skin cancer risk was 16–25% higher in people who had ever used a sunbed at any age, compared with those who had never used sunbeds. It further said that using a sunbed just once before the age of 35 could significantly increase the risk of melanoma.
Whilst we welcomed Byrokko’s confirmation that they would not use similar claims in future, because the ad suggested that consumers could quickly and safely achieve a tan using the product on a sunbed, and given the potentially serious consequences for people who used sunbeds, we concluded that the ad was misleading and irresponsible.
The ad breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 1.3 (Responsible advertising) and 3.1 (Misleading advertising).
Action
The ad must not appear again in the form investigated. We told Byrokko to ensure their ads did not irresponsibly or misleadingly claim or imply that using their product during sunbed use could help consumers achieve a tan quickly and safely. In addition, they should not state or imply that the use of sunbeds was safe.
