Beauty products, grooming and hygiene

Helpful information on the advertising rules for beauty, grooming and hygiene products, and examples of previous Advertising Standards Authority rulings in this area.

Over the years, demand for glitzy products and procedures designed to help us look younger, healthier and more beautiful, has created a multi-million pound industry. But this industry is competitive and it is one that plays heavily on aesthetic appeal to promote its products. While there’s nothing wrong with painting a positive picture, there is a line to be drawn to ensure that ads don’t over-exaggerate the benefits that a beauty, grooming or hygiene product can have. That’s why we have strict rules in place to protect consumers from potentially misleading or socially irresponsible ads for beauty products.

The main areas of complaint we see for ads for beauty, grooming and hygiene products are around the use of post-production techniques and whether advertisers can prove the claims they are making.

Like all ads, advertisers marketing beauty, grooming and hygiene products must be able to provide evidence for any claims they are making in their ads about the efficacy of their product. This includes claims like “65% reduction in the appearance of wrinkles”, “8/10 women agreed their skin looked smoother” and “The UK’s number one shampoo for coloured hair.”

Whilst our rules do allow for the use of airbrushing and other post-production techniques, advertisers should make clear that these techniques have been used through the use of superimposed qualifications or disclaimers, and they should not be used to such an extent that they exaggerate the capabilities of the product. Similarly, the use of “before” and “after” pictures are allowed but not if post-production techniques were only used on the “after” picture.

+ Read more - Show less

Latest rulings

Under Armour UK Ltd
- Upheld
- Internet (on own site)
- 13 November 2019
Website claims for Under Armour’s Athlete Recovery Sleepwear range were not backed up with adequate evidence.
The White Star Key Group Ltd
- Upheld
- Internet (social networking)
- 31 July 2019
An Instagram post promoting a weight loss food supplement, published by Influencer Jemma Lucy (@jemlucy) on 5 May 2019 showed her sitting at a table in a bikini and socks, holding a mug. Three packets were featured on the table. Text stated “I’ve been staying in shape with my go to @skinnycaffe products....
Unilever UK Ltd
- Not Upheld
- 31 July 2019
An Instagram post for Radox, posted on 14 June 2018, featured a picture of a bottle of Radox shower gel which featured the claim “100% NATURE INSPIRED FRAGRANCE”. Below that on the bottle there was a prominent image of the Radox logo, a leaf, berries and text that stated “FEEL DETOXED acai berry sc...
Kimberly-Clark Ltd t/a Andrex
- Upheld
- Internet (on own site)
- 16 October 2019
A webpage for toilet wipes broke the rules for omitting material information around the standards the products conformed to.

View all rulings

Beauty products, grooming and hygiene

Helpful information on the advertising rules for beauty, grooming and hygiene products, and examples of previous Advertising Standards Authority rulings in this area.

Latest news

A fine line - the dos and don’ts of advertising Botox

Staying out for the summer – sun safety and the Ad Code

Acne and spots – Putting the squeeze on marketers to deep clean skin product ads

Are your toothpaste claims ‘all-white’?

CBD – A potted history and how not to hash up

Our Inaugural Rulings Podcast

Latest rulings

Under Armour UK Ltd

The White Star Key Group Ltd

Unilever UK Ltd

Kimberly-Clark Ltd t/a Andrex

Help getting it right

Popular advice

Guidance on the level of substantiation expected in health, beauty and slimming claims

Social Responsibility: Body Image

Toothpaste: General

Relevant codes