Phi Harmonics Ltd

Background

Summary of Council decision:

Two issues were investigated both of which were Upheld.

Ad description

Claims on the Phi Harmonics website, www.electrodots.com, promoted a device that could be attached to electronic equipment. Text under the heading "concept" stated: "It's estimated that the global explosion in communications and wireless technologies has increased the background levels of electromagnetic radiation (EMR) on our planet millions of times compared to the levels our grandparents experienced. These man-made electromagnetic fields (EMFs) are different to the ones that occur in nature and they produce an environment in which our bodies have difficulty sustaining ideal levels of physical health and well-being. This is occurring because each of our cells acts like an antenna, making our bodies extremely sensitive receivers and transmitters of electromagnetic radiation ... So, imagine there's an invisible pollutant that is affecting all of us on the cellular level. Imagine we all contribute to this pollution on a daily basis simply by watching TV or calling our friends or using the internet or driving cars ... If you are experiencing otherwise unaccountable symptoms of tiredness, lack of concentration, headaches, dizziness, irritability and depression, among others, they may relate to EMF exposure. If you or your family use mobile technologies or are regularly exposed to electromagnetic frequencies (EMFs) from electronic equipment it's becoming increasingly essential to find ways to manage the effects of these intense levels of exposure. Harmonising the EMFs from the electronic equipment you use is easy with electroDOT - and it can create a healing effect to benefit your health and the world around you also ...".

Issue

Devon Trading Standards Service challenged whether the following claims were misleading and could be substantiated:

1. "If you are experiencing otherwise unaccountable symptoms of tiredness, lack of concentration, headaches, dizziness, irritability and depression, among others, they may relate to EMF exposure"; and

2. the Electrodot "can create a healing effect to benefit your health and the world around you".

Response

1. All Phi Harmonics Ltd said the claim was not an 'efficacy claim' but was a list of some of the more common symptoms associated with the effects of certain electromagnetic frequencies on the human body which were well-researched, reported and documented. They said there was a publicly available body of evidence and the publications of governmental and inter-governmental agencies had raised concerns about the damage which artificially generated EMFs could cause to human and animal tissue and the connection between that and mobile telephony. They said the symptoms of what was known as electro-sensitivity or electrical hypersensitivity, as referred to on their website, were widely documented in studies and surveys.

They referred to a report from the World Health Organisation's (WHO) International Agency for Research on Cancer, entitled "IARC classifies radiofrequency electromagnetic fields as possibly carcinogenic to humans", which they considered showed that electromagnetic fields produced by mobile phones were classified by the International Agency for Research on Cancer as possibly carcinogenic to humans. They said that studies were ongoing in order to fully assess potential long-term effects of mobile phone use and WHO would conduct a formal risk assessment of all studied health outcomes from radiofrequency fields exposure that year.

They referred to a report issued by the Committee on the Environment, Agriculture and Local and Regional Affairs of the Council of Europe entitled 'The potential dangers of electromagnetic fields and their effect on the environment' which they said provided a summary of the commercial and political issues. They said the report showed the flaws in the case advanced by the telephony operators that their industrial and commercial activities did not have any adverse effect on human health, and also suggested reasons for the disparities between the evidence gathered and relied upon by both governmental and commercially interested parties.

They said specific symptoms of the effects of low and very high frequency EMFs were mentioned in the report and highlighted the references in the report. They said the wording detailed a variety of possible symptoms produced by exposure to artificial EMFs. They said the report contained a reasonably comprehensive and representative body of evidence of the current state of play regarding the issues on the effects of artificial EMFs.

They said that the ad stated "may" and "can", which they considered would be understood to mean that not all of the symptoms cited on the website or even one alone, would, with any certainty, be the result exclusively of exposure to EMFs. They said headaches could be the result of a range of causes: persistent loud noise, traffic fumes or other chemical exposure, lack of sleep, too much sun, alcohol, poor diet, EMFs, work-related or other stress, biochemical imbalances, allergies, etc, and in seeking alleviation of a headache, it was natural to identify and eliminate all obvious causes. They were intended to convey that, if the causes of the symptoms experienced were 'otherwise unaccountable ... they may relate to EMF exposure.'

2. They said that, when seeking to validate the effectiveness of the electroDOT in alleviating the symptoms listed as being caused by EMFs, they had commissioned a variety of studies over time, each using different analytical techniques carried out under laboratory conditions and they provided the studies to support the claims. They added that some of the research was available on their website. They provided a number of studies.

Phi Harmonics Ltd

Assessment

1. Upheld

The ASA noted that the website made general claims about the effects of "man-made electromagnetic fields" (EMF), and maintained that EMF could "produce an environment in which [people's] bodies have difficulty sustaining ideal levels of physical health and well-being". We considered the main focus of the website was to market the electroDOT product, a device which users could attach to their electronic equipment, and to promote the benefits and effects of using that product, and, in that context, considered that consumers would infer from the claim "If you are experiencing otherwise unaccountable symptoms of tiredness, lack of concentration, headaches, dizziness, irritability and depression, among others, they may relate to EMF exposure", that using the electroDOT could treat or prevent the listed conditions and ailments, which were likely to be caused by exposure to some electronic equipment.

Although we noted that the documentation provided showed that some research had been carried out into the harmful effects of electromagnetic radiation, we understood that, overall, the results were currently inconclusive in terms of the general effects of electromagnetic radiation on people. In addition, we did not consider that the additional studies provided by the advertisers were sufficiently relevant or robust to support the implied claim that the product could prevent the listed conditions and ailments. On that basis, we concluded that the claims were likely to mislead.

On that point, the claims breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 3.1 3.1 Marketing communications must not materially mislead or be likely to do so. (Misleading advertising), 3.7 3.7 Before distributing or submitting a marketing communication for publication, marketers must hold documentary evidence to prove claims that consumers are likely to regard as objective and that are capable of objective substantiation. The ASA may regard claims as misleading in the absence of adequate substantiation. (Substantiation) and 3.11 3.11 Marketing communications must not mislead consumers by exaggerating the capability or performance of a product. (Exaggeration).

2. Upheld

We noted that the claim "Harmonising the EMFs from the electronic equipment you use is easy with electroDOT - and it can create a healing effect to benefit your health and the world around you also ..." appeared in a paragraph which referred to "tiredness, lack of concentration, headaches, dizziness, irritability and depression" and which suggested that the effects of EMFs from electronic equipment could be a cause of those conditions and ailments. We therefore considered that consumers would infer that the "healing effect" of using electroDOT went beyond spiritual or emotional healing, and that using the product had physical benefits, such as preventing the conditions and ailments listed.

We did not consider that the evidence provided showed that using the electroDOT had a physical "healing effect", for example, on the listed conditions and ailments. On that basis, we concluded that the claims were likely to mislead.

Action

The claims must not appear again in their current form.

CAP Code (Edition 12)

3.1 3.11 3.7

ASA Adjudication on Phi Harmonics Ltd

Background

Ad description

Issue

Response

Assessment

Action

CAP Code (Edition 12)

More on

Help getting it right

Recommended resources

Types of claims: "Safe"

Broadband and Telecoms: Comparisons

Broadband and Telecoms: Unlimited Claims