Tag: CE

New York, NY – February 1, 2023 – The National Advertising Division (NAD) of BBB National Programs recommended that Charter Communications, Inc. discontinue or modify the claim that Spectrum is America’s leading internet service provider (ISP). NAD also recommended that Charter discontinue the claim “Advanced WiFi. A better kind of internet” or modify it to avoid conveying a message of superiority over Spectrum’s competitors.

The claims at issue, which appeared across several forms of media, were challenged by AT&T Services, Inc.

 

America’s “Leading” ISP Claims

Advertisers must be careful to avoid conveying unintended comparative superiority messages against the products or services of their competitors if such message is not supported.

With respect to the messages reasonably conveyed by the “America’s leading internet provider” claim in the challenged advertisements, NAD determined that while consumers may understand the claim as relating to market share, in the context of the challenged advertisements consumers may also reasonably interpret the message to be that Spectrum Internet:

• Has the most subscribers of any ISP in America;
• Provides the fastest speeds of any ISP in America; and
• Is superior to all other ISPs with respect to reliability and security.

 

Because these messages were not supported by Charter’s evidence, NAD recommended that Charter discontinue claims that Spectrum Internet is America’s leading internet service provider or modify the claim or its use of the claim to avoid conveying such messages.

NAD noted that nothing in its decision prevents Charter from promoting that Spectrum Internet has the most subscribers among ISPs against which it competes or making claims of comparative performance superiority for which it has support.

 

“Better Kind of Internet” Claims

NAD determined that the claim that Spectrum offers “Advanced WiFi. A better kind of internet,” conveys the message that WiFi services with enhanced security and the ability to handle up to 200 devices are “better” than services without those features. Further, NAD found that in the context of the challenged advertisement, this claim also reasonably conveys a message of superiority over Spectrum’s competitors – an unsupported message.

Therefore, NAD recommended that Charter discontinue the claim “Advanced WiFi. A better kind of internet” or modify its advertising to avoid conveying the message that Spectrum Internet provides an internet experience that is superior to the internet experience provided by other ISPs because Spectrum’s WiFi is advanced relative to other ISP’s WiFi.

In its advertiser statement, Charter stated that while it “disagrees” with certain aspects of NAD’s decision, “it is a strong supporter of self-regulation and will comply with NAD’s recommendations.”

All BBB National Programs case decision summaries can be found in the case decision library. For the full text of NAD, NARB, and CARU decisions, subscribe to the online archive.

 

About BBB National Programs: BBB National Programs, a non-profit organization, is the home of U.S. independent industry self-regulation, currently operating more than a dozen globally recognized programs that have been helping enhance consumer trust in business for more than 50 years. These programs provide third-party accountability and dispute resolution services that address existing and emerging industry issues, create a fairer playing field for businesses, and a better experience for consumers. BBB National Programs continues to evolve its work and grow its impact by providing business guidance and fostering best practices in arenas such as advertising, child-and-teen-directed marketing, data privacy, dispute resolution, automobile warranty, technology, and emerging areas. To learn more, visit bbbprograms.org.

About the National Advertising Division: The National Advertising Division (NAD) of BBB National Programs provides independent self-regulation and dispute resolution services, guiding the truthfulness of advertising across the U.S. NAD reviews national advertising in all media and its decisions set consistent standards for advertising truth and accuracy, delivering meaningful protection to consumers and leveling the playing field for business.

• Roughly one-quarter (27%) of Americans with traditional vehicles will consider EV purchase for next car
• Affordability (58%) and range anxiety (42%) remain top areas of concern for traditional vehicle owners
• 5 in 6 (83%) American drivers[1] unsure what type of tire an EV needs, including half (52%) of current EV owners

 

GREENVILLE, S.C., Jan 31, 2023 – As the EV revolution accelerates through the U.S., a recent survey from Michelin[2] shows concerns over the unknown remain an obstacle for many Americans, even EV owners.

“For 130 years, Michelin has been obsessed with mobility that maximizes the customer experience,” said Alexis Garcin, president and CEO of Michelin North America, Inc. “We are passionate about innovation, and that has positioned us to accelerate the EV transformation. Our research and development teams continue to launch new technologies that improve rolling resistance, maximizing performance and minimizing the environmental impact of mobility.”

According to the Global EV Outlook 2022 report, sales of electric vehicles could represent 50% of the market by 2030. However, Michelin found that affordability (59%), range anxiety (43%), and a home charging setup (37%) remain top areas of concern for traditional vehicle owners. Still, two-thirds of EV owners agree (67%) driving performance is better with EVs over traditional vehicles, and 82% are likely to consider buying another EV as their next vehicle.

While EVs may feel new and unknown for consumers, Michelin has been anticipating and preparing for the EV transformation for more than 40 years. To accelerate the transition, consumers will have to reset their view of tires. No longer just one of many vehicle features; they are now the most important range extending feature of an EV. Michelin sees an opportunity to help consumers on this journey. Confidence in tire performance, including the ability to drive in all types of weather with an EV, is a top priority among U.S. drivers (35%). Yet most are unsure of what tire an EV needs (83%).

 

• If longevity is the primary concern, look for tires with significant wear performance like the MICHELIN^®Defender^®2 tire.
•  Knowing that quieter EV engines highlight tire noise on uneven or rough road surfaces, EV-specific tires like the MICHELIN^® Pilot^® Sport EV often come with acoustic dampening foam or other advanced technology designed to help reduce noise.
• Lastly, EV-specific tires like the MICHELIN^® Pilot^® Sport EV are designed for summer wet and dry conditions that respond to the instant torque of EVs and deliver the ultra-high performance EVs are known for. Drivers with summer tires who are concerned about all-season performance would best be served by an all-season offering like the MICHELIN^® Pilot^® Sport All-Season 4 tire, which delivers elevated performance across climates.

 

As automakers create more EV models, Michelin is committed to leading the charge in optimizing tire performance for all EVs. To find out why 8 out of 10 EV manufacturers use Michelin tires, please visit: https://www.michelinman.com/auto/electric-vehicle-tires.

 

[1] Drivers are defined as vehicle owners and lessees for this survey.

[2] Methodology: All figures, unless otherwise stated, are from YouGov Plc.  Total sample size was 1,171 adults, among whom 957 own or lease a vehicle. Fieldwork was undertaken between Sept. 30^th, 2022, and Oct. 3rd, 2022. The survey was carried out online. The figures have been weighted and are representative of all US adults, aged 18 years and older.

Contact Information:

Name: Christian Fisher

Email: christian.fisher@michelin.com  |  www.michelinmedia.com  

New York, NY – January 31, 2023 – In a challenge brought by Kimberly-Clark Corporation, the National Advertising Division (NAD) of BBB National Programs determined that Dyper, Inc. provided a reasonable basis for claims that certain components of its bamboo viscose diapers are biodegradable but recommended that the claim be further qualified to make clear the circumstances in which the stated diaper components would actually degrade.

NAD also concluded that the claim Dyper’s “Feel more like yoga pants” was a fanciful claim and therefore did not require substantiation.

“Biodegradable” Claim

Kimberly-Clark challenged Dyper’s “biodegradable” claim, which appears in a colored chart on Dyper’s website highlighting four biodegradable components of a Dyper diaper: (1) bamboo viscose fiber nonwoven, (2) tissue, (3) chlorine-free wood pulp, and (4) film.

NAD determined that the challenged chart clearly and conspicuously indicates that only certain components of the diaper are biodegradable and the advertiser’s evidence establishes that these components are fully biodegradable.

Although Dyper’s evidence established that certain components of its diapers are biodegradable, NAD determined that Dyper’s “biodegradable” claim as presented could still be misleading as to the ability of those components to degrade in practice.

NAD therefore recommended that Dyper’s “biodegradable” claim be further qualified to make clear the circumstances in which the stated diaper components would actually degrade.

“Feel More Like Yoga Pants” Claim

NAD considered whether the claim that Dyper diapers “Feel more like yoga pants” is a superior softness and comfort claim. NAD determined that although the challenged claim evokes recognized attributes of yoga pants generally, reasonable consumers would not expect substantiation for such a claim.

Other Claims

During the proceeding, Dyper voluntarily permanently discontinued several challenged environmental benefit claims. Therefore, NAD did not review these claims on the merits.

In its advertiser statement, Dyper stated that it “will comply with National Advertising Division’s recommendations” and that it “appreciates the NAD’s recommendation that Dyper clarify the biodegradability of certain materials used in its products.”

All BBB National Programs case decision summaries can be found in the case decision library. For the full text of NAD, NARB, and CARU decisions, subscribe to the online archive.

About BBB National Programs: BBB National Programs, a non-profit organization, is the home of U.S. independent industry self-regulation, currently operating more than a dozen globally recognized programs that have been helping enhance consumer trust in business for more than 50 years. These programs provide third-party accountability and dispute resolution services that address existing and emerging industry issues, create a fairer playing field for businesses, and a better experience for consumers. BBB National Programs continues to evolve its work and grow its impact by providing business guidance and fostering best practices in arenas such as advertising, child-and-teen-directed marketing, data privacy, dispute resolution, automobile warranty, technology, and emerging areas. To learn more, visit bbbprograms.org.

About the National Advertising Division: The National Advertising Division (NAD) of BBB National Programs provides independent self-regulation and dispute resolution services, guiding the truthfulness of advertising across the U.S. NAD reviews national advertising in all media and its decisions set consistent standards for advertising truth and accuracy, delivering meaningful protection to consumers and leveling the playing field for business.

New York, NY – January 31, 2023 – Comcast Cable Communications Management, LLC, originally filed a Fast-Track SWIFT challenge against competitor T-Mobile US, Inc.’s claim that it has “customer loyalty 4 x higher than Xfinity” made in a television commercial promoting T-Mobile’s Home Internet service. BBB National Programs National Advertising Division (NAD) determined that the challenge was not appropriate for SWIFT and Comcast refiled the challenge in Standard Track.

Although T-Mobile contended that NAD did not have jurisdiction to consider this challenge because the television commercial with the challenged claim appeared only in the Philadelphia, Pennsylvania market, and was permanently discontinued prior to the commencement of the Standard Track challenge, NAD determined that it has jurisdiction over the advertising claim at issue in this case because:

• A large metropolitan area such as Philadelphia may constitute a substantial portion of the United States.
• The advertising is national in character as the claim references a national customer loyalty survey.
• The challenged claim had not been permanently withdrawn prior to the date of the SWIFT complaint.

 

During the proceeding, T-Mobile informed NAD that it had permanently discontinued the “customer loyalty 4x higher than Xfinity” claim for business reasons. Therefore, NAD did not review the claim on its merits.

In its advertiser statement, T-Mobile stated that despite its “respectful disagreement” with “NAD’s conclusion that it has jurisdiction over this matter” it “remain[s] a supporter of the self-regulatory process.”

All BBB National Programs case decision summaries can be found in the case decision library. For the full text of NAD, NARB, and CARU decisions, subscribe to the online archive.

 

About BBB National Programs: BBB National Programs, a non-profit organization, is the home of U.S. independent industry self-regulation, currently operating more than a dozen globally recognized programs that have been helping enhance consumer trust in business for more than 50 years. These programs provide third-party accountability and dispute resolution services that address existing and emerging industry issues, create a fairer playing field for businesses, and a better experience for consumers. BBB National Programs continues to evolve its work and grow its impact by providing business guidance and fostering best practices in arenas such as advertising, child-and-teen-directed marketing, data privacy, dispute resolution, automobile warranty, technology, and emerging areas. To learn more, visit bbbprograms.org.

About the National Advertising Division: The National Advertising Division (NAD) of BBB National Programs provides independent self-regulation and dispute resolution services, guiding the truthfulness of advertising across the U.S. NAD reviews national advertising in all media and its decisions set consistent standards for advertising truth and accuracy, delivering meaningful protection to consumers and leveling the playing field for business.

McLean, VA – January 26, 2023 – The Direct Selling Self-Regulatory Council (DSSRC) of BBB National Programs has referred direct selling company Perfectly Posh, LLC. to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and Utah Attorney General for possible enforcement action. The referral comes after a lack of response from Perfectly Posh to a DSSRC inquiry into aggressive earnings claims made on social media by Perfectly Posh salesforce members.

DSSRC is an independent national advertising self-regulation program that monitors advertising and marketing claims in the direct selling industry. Perfectly Posh is a direct selling company that markets personal care and beauty products.

At issue are earnings claims indicating that Perfectly Posh salesforce members can replace their income by participating in the Perfectly Posh business opportunity. Claims included:

• “Do it to replace income. Enjoy the freedom, fun, & flexibility. Run YOUR hobby or business like YOU want to.”
• “Whether you are looking for a discount on great products for yourself and your friends and family, or a side gig to add some extra income, or to replace a full-time income.”
• “That’s all it costs for a LIFETIME discount on Perfectly Posh products! Do it for yourself. Do it for some extra spending money. Do it to replace income.”
• “Whether you just want extra money for vacations, or to pay down debt or to replace your full time income, I’m ready for you!”

After multiple attempts via mail and phone, Perfectly Posh has failed to respond to DSSRC’s inquiry and, pursuant to DSSRC Policies and Procedures, has now been referred to the FTC and the Utah Attorney General for possible enforcement action.

All BBB National Programs case decision summaries can be found in the case decision library. For the full text of DSSRC decisions, visit the DSSRC Cases and Closures webpage.

About BBB National Programs: BBB National Programs, a non-profit organization, is the home of U.S. independent industry self-regulation, currently operating more than a dozen globally recognized programs that have been helping enhance consumer trust in business for more than 50 years. These programs provide third-party accountability and dispute resolution services that address existing and emerging industry issues, create a fairer playing field for businesses, and a better experience for consumers. BBB National Programs continues to evolve its work and grow its impact by providing business guidance and fostering best practices in arenas such as advertising, child-and-teen-directed marketing, data privacy, dispute resolution, automobile warranty, technology, and emerging areas. To learn more, visit bbbprograms.org.

About the Direct Selling Self-Regulatory Council: The Direct Selling Self-Regulatory Council (DSSRC), a division of BBB National Programs, provides independent, impartial monitoring, dispute resolution, and enforcement of false product claims and income representations made by direct selling companies and their salesforce members across digital platforms. The DSSRC seeks to establish high standards of integrity and business ethics for all direct selling companies in the marketplace.

New York, NY – January 23, 2023 – In a challenge brought by Comcast Cable Communications Management, LLC, the National Advertising Division (NAD) of BBB National Programs determined that T-Mobile USA, Inc.’s advertising for T-Mobile Home Internet (T-HINT) provided a reasonable basis for its price lock claim and concluded that other challenged claims did not convey false or misleading messages.

However, NAD recommended that T-Mobile:

• Discontinue claims that T-HINT is “fast” or “high-speed” or modify its advertising to avoid conveying a message that T-HINT will be “fast” or “high-speed” for all T-HINT customers.
• Discontinue claims that T-HINT is “reliable.”
• Modify its advertising to avoid communicating several monadic and comparative implied claims with respect to T-HINT performance.

 

Price Claim

NAD determined that the main message conveyed by the claim that with T-HINT “your price is locked in” is that T-Mobile will not increase the monthly price charged to customers for T-HINT service. Because T-Mobile has not increased the monthly price charged to T-HINT subscribers since the introduction of the “your price is locked in” claim, NAD found this claim supported.

 

“Fast” and “High-Speed” Claims

T-HINT customers experience a range of speeds. NAD determined that T-Mobile did not provide sufficient evidence to conclude that all T-HINT customers receive speeds above the Federal Communication Commission’s standards for high-speed broadband internet and thus did not provide a reasonable basis of support for its “fast” or “high-speed” claims.

 

“Reliable” Claims

NAD found that, in context, T-Mobile’s claims that T-HINT is “reliable” may convey the messages that T-HINT customers will maintain a dependable internet connection and that T-HINT consistently delivers fast speeds and service without disruption. NAD determined that T-Mobile did not provide a reasonable basis to support these messages.

 

Implied Performance Claims

NAD found that unqualified claims that T-HINT is “fast,” “high-speed,” and “reliable,” convey a message that T-HINT customers will consistently receive fast speeds. To avoid conveying this message, NAD recommended that T-Mobile:

• Modify its advertising to avoid implying that all T-Mobile customers receive consistently fast speeds; and
• Modify its T-HINT speed range claims to include the percentiles of T-HINT customers to which any stated speed ranges apply or disclose that many T-HINT customers will experience slower speeds.

To distinguish T-HINT from wired internet service and avoid conveying a message that T-HINT is not subject to factors that cause internet performance variability on mobile wireless networks, NAD recommended that T-Mobile modify its T-HINT advertising to clearly and conspicuously disclose that:

• T-HINT provides internet access through a mobile wireless network; and
• T-HINT speeds vary due to factors affecting mobile wireless networks.

Further, to avoid conveying a message that T-HINT customers will receive the same or better speeds than T-Mobile wireless customers at all times, NAD recommended that when T-Mobile makes express or implied claims about T-HINT speeds, it clearly and conspicuously disclose that T-HINT subscribers may experience slower speeds than T-Mobile customers during times of network congestion.

NAD also found that the claim “Breaking up with your provider is easy” did not convey a false or misleading message that T-Mobile’s Home Internet subscribers will receive internet speeds and service comparable to competing home internet service providers.

During the proceeding, T-Mobile voluntarily permanently discontinued several challenged savings claims and a testimonial. Therefore, NAD did not review these claims on the merits.

In its advertiser statement, T-Mobile stated that it “will appeal parts of NAD’s decision,” based on its belief that NAD erred in its determination that the challenged “fast,” “high-speed,” and “reliable” monadic claims for T-HINT are not supported.

Appeals of NAD decisions are made to BBB National Programs’ National Advertising Review Board (NARB), the appellate-level truth-in-advertising body of BBB National Programs.

All BBB National Programs case decision summaries can be found in the case decision library. For the full text of NAD, NARB, and CARU decisions, subscribe to the online archive.

About BBB National Programs: BBB National Programs, a non-profit organization, is the home of U.S. independent industry self-regulation, currently operating more than a dozen globally recognized programs that have been helping enhance consumer trust in business for more than 50 years. These programs provide third-party accountability and dispute resolution services that address existing and emerging industry issues, create a fairer playing field for businesses, and a better experience for consumers. BBB National Programs continues to evolve its work and grow its impact by providing business guidance and fostering best practices in arenas such as advertising, child-and-teen-directed marketing, data privacy, dispute resolution, automobile warranty, technology, and emerging areas. To learn more, visit bbbprograms.org.

About the National Advertising Division: The National Advertising Division (NAD) of BBB National Programs provides independent self-regulation and dispute resolution services, guiding the truthfulness of advertising across the U.S. NAD reviews national advertising in all media and its decisions set consistent standards for advertising truth and accuracy, delivering meaningful protection to consumers and leveling the playing field for business.

National Advertising Division Recommends Cox Discontinue Implied Superior Reliability Claim for Cox Internet

 

New York, NY – January 19, 2023 – Acting on a challenge by AT&T Services, Inc., the National Advertising Division (NAD) of BBB National Programs recommended that Cox Communications, Inc. discontinue advertising that conveys the implied message that internet from competing services is glitchy and unreliable, but Cox Internet is not.

AT&T Services challenged claims made by Cox in a television commercial for its “Gigablast” internet service that provides download speeds of 1 Gbps and upload speeds of up to 35 Mbps.

At issue for NAD was whether the challenged commercial’s depiction of the failure of an unnamed, generic competing service to reliably stream a baseball broadcast reasonably conveys:

• a broad implied message of superior reliability for Cox Internet over competing services; or
• whether it communicates a limited message about Cox’s ability to provide 4K streaming.

 

Though an advertiser is free to highlight the actual differences between its product and competing products, claims that highlight the shortcomings of a competing product must be truthful, accurate, and narrowly drawn so as not to falsely disparage the competitor. When highlighting a problem of a competing product that the advertiser’s own product can resolve, the advertiser must ensure that the problem is clearly identified in the ad, the extent of the problem is not exaggerated, and the advertiser’s product solves the problem.

In this case, NAD found that:

• The challenged commercial depicts a streaming failure but does not suggest a reason for the failure, other than “internet from the wrong provider.” Accordingly, consumers may reasonably conclude that the man’s experience is typical and that the “wrong” internet refers to any competing provider.
• In the context of the commercial, which includes an express message about the high speeds offered by Cox Internet (“America’s Fastest Internet Download Speeds”) and an image of a television freezing images, one reasonable message conveyed is that Cox Internet can reliably stream live video when other providers cannot because they are glitchy and unreliable.

 

NAD concluded that Cox Internet did not provide evidence to support a broad message of comparative superiority over all other providers or any specific message that other internet providers are insufficient for the streaming activity depicted in the commercial. AT&T provided evidence that other providers, including AT&T, offer internet speeds sufficient for routine streaming, as well as speeds above that which is recommended for 4K content (50-100 Mbps and higher).

For these reasons, NAD recommended that Cox discontinue advertising that conveys the implied message that internet from competing services is glitchy and unreliable, but Cox Internet is not.

NAD noted that nothing in its decision precludes the advertiser from making narrower truthful and non-misleading claims about the speed and performance of its service and its ability to stream 4K video.

In its advertiser statement, Cox stated that although it “disagrees with NAD’s interpretation of the advertising at issue” it “will take NAD’s recommendations into consideration in its future advertising.”

All BBB National Programs case decision summaries can be found in the case decision library. For the full text of NAD, NARB, and CARU decisions, subscribe to the online archive.

 

About BBB National Programs: BBB National Programs, a non-profit organization, is the home of U.S. independent industry self-regulation, currently operating more than a dozen globally recognized programs that have been helping enhance consumer trust in business for more than 50 years. These programs provide third-party accountability and dispute resolution services that address existing and emerging industry issues, create a fairer playing field for businesses, and a better experience for consumers. BBB National Programs continues to evolve its work and grow its impact by providing business guidance and fostering best practices in arenas such as advertising, child-and-teen-directed marketing, data privacy, dispute resolution, automobile warranty, technology, and emerging areas. To learn more, visit bbbprograms.org.

 

About the National Advertising Division: The National Advertising Division (NAD) of BBB National Programs provides independent self-regulation and dispute resolution services, guiding the truthfulness of advertising across the U.S. NAD reviews national advertising in all media and its decisions set consistent standards for advertising truth and accuracy, delivering meaningful protection to consumers and leveling the playing field for business.

New York, NY – January 19, 2023 – The National Advertising Division (NAD) of BBB National Programs determined that Novartis Pharmaceutical provided a reasonable basis for the claim that its Kisqali breast cancer treatment drug is “The only CDK4/6 inhibitor with statistically significant overall survival proven across 3 phase III trials” when directed to an audience of health care professionals (HCPs).

However, NAD recommended that a substantially similar claim in consumer-facing advertising, along with several implied comparative superiority claims, be discontinued.

Eli Lilly, manufacturer of the competing Verzenio drug to treat metastatic breast cancer, challenged survival benefit claims made in Novartis’ advertising campaign for Kisqali.

Metastatic breast cancer is presently incurable, however, current treatments can reduce the spread of cancer to other parts of the body, consequently extending time without disease progression (known as progression-free survival) and enabling patients to live longer—an outcome referred to as “overall survival.” Treatments include blocking the estrogen pathway (hormonal therapy), chemotherapy, and targeted treatments, including treatments that function as CDK4/6 inhibitors.

At issue before NAD was whether Novartis’ claims about Kisqali’s overall survival outcomes in clinical trials convey a message of superior survival benefits over other CDK4/6 inhibitors and imply that patients will live longer with Kisqali than when taking any other competitor’s drug in class.

 

HCP-Directed Advertising

NAD considered the claim that Kisqali is “The only CDK4/6 inhibitor with statistically significant overall survival proven across 3 phase III trials” that appears in HCP-directed advertising. NAD has long recognized that health care providers and specialists are a sophisticated audience and are better equipped to decipher the advertised results of clinical data than the general consumer, especially when provided with appropriate context and detail.

NAD concluded that clinical experience and the context provided in the advertiser’s HCP-directed brochures would both inform the physician’s takeaway of the claim and limit it to the recited facts, and that this audience would interpret the comparative claim here simply as reporting that Kisqali is unique in achieving a statistically significant overall survival benefit across Novartis’ three phase III clinical trials.

After assessing the results of the advertiser’s three clinical trials published in the New England Journal of Medicine, NAD determined that the advertiser had provided a reasonable basis for the HCP-directed claim.

 

Consumer-Directed Advertising

With respect to the consumer-directed claim, “Only drug in class with consistently proven survival benefit in HR+/HER2- metastatic breast cancer”* *“across three Phase III trials,” NAD determined that the claim was inherently comparative. NAD therefore concluded that one message reasonably conveyed to consumers, who NAD determined lack the medical knowledge or experience to understand nuances in clinical trial design or outcomes, is that Kisqali is more effective and provides superior survival benefits.

Further, NAD determined that due to the numerous variations in trial design and other key metrics across clinical trials, the studies submitted are not similar enough to compare the overall survival data or other results. NAD noted that where express or implied comparative performance claims are being made, head-to-head studies of the products at issue constitute the most reliable and persuasive substantiation.

NAD therefore recommended that in consumer-facing advertising, the advertiser discontinue the claim “Only drug in class with consistently proven survival benefit in HR+/HER2- metastatic breast cancer” * *“across three Phase III trials” as well as the implied claims that:

• Kisqali provides superior survival benefits as compared to any other available treatment in the CDK4/6 inhibitor class generally and to Verzenio specifically.
• Patients will live longer with Kisqali as compared to any other available treatment in the CDK4/6 inhibitor class generally and to Verzenio specifically.

 

During the proceeding, the advertiser permanently discontinued several challenged express and implied survival benefit claims. Therefore, NAD did not review these claims on the merits.

In its advertiser statement, Novartis stated that although it respectfully disagrees with NAD’s findings, pursuant to NAD’s recommendation, Novartis plans to discontinue the claim in consumer-facing advertising.

All BBB National Programs case decision summaries can be found in the case decision library. For the full text of NAD, NARB, and CARU decisions, subscribe to the online archive.

 

About BBB National Programs: BBB National Programs, a non-profit organization, is the home of U.S. independent industry self-regulation, currently operating more than a dozen globally recognized programs that have been helping enhance consumer trust in business for more than 50 years. These programs provide third-party accountability and dispute resolution services that address existing and emerging industry issues, create a fairer playing field for businesses, and a better experience for consumers. BBB National Programs continues to evolve its work and grow its impact by providing business guidance and fostering best practices in arenas such as advertising, child-and-teen-directed marketing, data privacy, dispute resolution, automobile warranty, technology, and emerging areas. To learn more, visit bbbprograms.org.

About the National Advertising Division: The National Advertising Division (NAD) of BBB National Programs provides independent self-regulation and dispute resolution services, guiding the truthfulness of advertising across the U.S. NAD reviews national advertising in all media and its decisions set consistent standards for advertising truth and accuracy, delivering meaningful protection to consumers and leveling the playing field for business.

New York, NY – January 12, 2023 – The National Advertising Division (NAD) of BBB National Programs examined a number of challenged health-related claims by RhinoSystems, Inc. and found that the challenged packaging claims and many website claims did not convey virus prevention claims. However, NAD recommended that RhinoSystems discontinue certain other health-related claims that appeared in one television and two radio commercials or on the Naväge website, including:

 

• The express virus prevention claim on the Naväge website “using products such as Naväge Nasal Care not only avoids steroids and pills, but helps to avoid allergies, post-nasal drip, and a cold or flu.”
• Any implied virus prevention claims in its 2022 television commercial, the two challenged radio commercials and on Naväge’s website.
• The claim on the Naväge website “doctors love nasal irrigation.”

 

The claims at issue were challenged by competitor NeilMed Pharmaceuticals, manufacturer and supplier of competing nasal irrigation systems.

The parties to the challenge did not dispute that saline nasal irrigation “flushes out” viruses or that it provides symptom relief and mitigation. At issue before NAD was whether the advertiser’s express and implied claims convey a message that the use of Naväge or nasal irrigation prevents or reduces the risk of contracting a cold, flu, or other virus and if so, whether those claims are supported.

 

Virus Prevention Claims

In reviewing the RhinoSystems claims for Naväge, NAD found that certain of the challenged website claims and all challenged packaging claims generally refer to flushing out germ and virus particles and do not rise to the level of virus prevention claims. For example, while some language goes so far as to say after flushing out the germs consumers will feel healthier, there is nothing indicating that use of the product will prevent contraction of the flu or other viral illness.

However, NAD determined that an implied virus prevention message is conveyed in Naväge’s 2022 television commercial, ­two challenged radio commercials, and by two claims on Naväge’s website which mention flushing out “infectious” germs and/or bacteria.

Cold and flu prevention claims are impactful to consumers and should be supported by competent and reliable scientific evidence that fits the claim. NAD reviewed the evidence provided by the advertiser for claims that the use of Naväge or nasal irrigation can help consumers avoid or prevent the contraction of infectious diseases like the cold and flu and found that the advertiser’s support for its claims included studies with methodological flaws with respect to the populations, controls, and different methods of delivery that were not a good fit for the broad prevention claims. Accordingly, NAD recommended that such claims be discontinued.

 

“Doctors Love Nasal Irrigation” Claim

NeilMed objected to claims on Naväge’s website that state, “Doctors Love Nasal Irrigation. Why? Because it’s clinically proven to relieve sinus congestion safely and effectively by flushing out allergens, mucus, and infectious airborne germs. And it does this completely naturally without drugs.”

While NAD did not agree with NeilMed that the “doctors love” claim indicates a doctor preference for Naväge specifically, NAD did conclude that it conveys the message that a significant number of doctors have come to a consensus; therefore, such a claim requires a well-conducted, random, and statistically significant survey of doctors as substantiation.

NAD determined that the evidence in the record regarding recommendations by medical associations and institutions of nasal irrigation is not a good fit to substantiate the more general claim at issue, and recommended that the claim be discontinued. NAD noted that nothing in its decision prevents the advertiser from making a more limited claim based on the specific recommendations of medical associations and institutions in the record.

During the proceeding, RhinoSystems voluntarily discontinued certain pandemic-related challenged claims, that appeared in a television commercial on the Naväge website therefore, NAD did not review these claims on the merits.

In its advertiser statement, RhinoSystems stated that it “will comply with NAD’s recommendations.” The advertiser further stated that while it respectfully disagrees with NAD’s conclusions regarding the lack of fit between its studies and the challenged claims and continues to believe that its claims are supported, “RhinoSystems is a supporter of the self-regulatory process and will take NAD’s recommendations into account in future advertising.”

All BBB National Programs case decision summaries can be found in the case decision library. For the full text of NAD, NARB, and CARU decisions, subscribe to the online archive.

 

About BBB National Programs: BBB National Programs, a non-profit organization, is the home of U.S. independent industry self-regulation, currently operating more than a dozen globally recognized programs that have been helping enhance consumer trust in business for more than 50 years. These programs provide third-party accountability and dispute resolution services that address existing and emerging industry issues, create a fairer playing field for businesses, and a better experience for consumers. BBB National Programs continues to evolve its work and grow its impact by providing business guidance and fostering best practices in arenas such as advertising, child-and-teen-directed marketing, data privacy, dispute resolution, automobile warranty, technology, and emerging areas. To learn more, visit bbbprograms.org.

About the National Advertising Division: The National Advertising Division (NAD) of BBB National Programs provides independent self-regulation and dispute resolution services, guiding the truthfulness of advertising across the U.S. NAD reviews national advertising in all media and its decisions set consistent standards for advertising truth and accuracy, delivering meaningful protection to consumers and leveling the playing field for business.