ERSP Finds Murad Can Support Certain Claims for Acne Complex; Recommends Marketer Modify, Discontinue Certain Claims

New York, NY – July 12, 2011 – The Electronic Retailing Self-Regulation Program (ERSP) has determined that Murad, Inc., provided adequate support for certain performance claims made in direct-response advertising for Acne Complex, a product marketed by the company, but recommended the marketer modify certain claims.

ERSP, the electronic direct-response industry’s self-regulatory forum, is administered by the Council of Better Business Bureaus (CBBB) with policy oversight by the National Advertising Review Council (NARC).

The marketer’s advertising came to ERSP’s attention through an anonymous challenge.

ERSP reviewed broadcast and online advertising for Acne Complex, and identified several claims for review, including:

• “Clear skin is as easy as 1, 2, 3 - and it only takes four weeks!” and “Get clear in 4 weeks. Guaranteed.”
• “See a difference in just 3 days.”
• “There are also a number of skin conditions that resemble acne such as eczema, perioral dermatitis and folliculitis. While they may not involve all of the factors that cause real acne, they do have one thing in common — inflammation. The good news is that Murad Acne products address ALL of the factors of acne and skin breakouts, reducing cell build-up, excess oil and inflammation.”
• "In a clinical study, 92% of users experienced a reduction of acne breakouts in just 3 days.”
• “...I have used the acne product for 3 days and my face is already clear!" [Brandi, MI]
• “After less than 1 week, my acne had disappeared and has not returned since!" [Karin Maki, MI]
• “Acne Complex works because… it does NOT contain Benzoyl Peroxide.”

ERSP determined that the marketer provided sufficient evidence to support the claim that “In a clinical study, 92% of users experienced a reduction of acne breakouts in just 3 days.”

However, ERSP remained concerned about the claim, “Get Clear in 4 weeks.” The marketer based its claim on two marketer-sponsored  4-week studies in which acne lesion counts were reduced, and a twelve week study referenced in the 1985 Tentative Monograph. The Food and Drug Administration, in its monograph regarding over-the-counter acne treatments, has explicitly outlined the language that may be used when referencing the efficacy of a product. ERSP noted it may not have been the intent of the FDA to permit a claim of “Get Clear” based upon a showing of reduced lesion counts after just four weeks. The FDA states, “Any treatment that continues to reduce lesion counts beyond 4 weeks is actually preventing the development of new acne.” Accordingly, ERSP recommended the marketer modify this claim to use the language found in the FDA monograph which, in part, includes the wording “clears,”  “clears up,” or “helps clear.”

Regarding claims referencing other skin conditions, ERSP found that Murad had adequately modified its advertising to limit its efficacy claims to the reduction of redness and inflammation associated with other conditions. Murad also voluntarily removed two of the related claims from its Website.

The marketer removed two of the testimonials that were the subject of the inquiry. In addition, the company included a disclosure on its testimonials page referencing testing showing that Acne Complex reduces acne lesion counts after four weeks.

ERSP remained concerned about comparative claims (i.e., “Acne Complex is the leading clinical skin care brand that is actually good for your skin” and “Acne Complex works because… it does NOT contain Benzoyl Peroxide”) that could be understood to mean that Acne Complex is more effective than products that contain benzoyl peroxide. ERSP recommended the marketer modify or discontinue such comparative claims until it can provide evidence to support each claim.  However, ERSP found Murad’s comparative claims appropriate when the distinction between salicylic acid and benzoyl peroxide is based purely on reduced irritation or redness.

The company, in its marketer’s statement, said, “Murad appreciates the careful review undertaken by ERSP and agrees to seriously consider ERSP’s recommendations in all future advertising and is voluntarily making the changes recommended by ERSP and outlined in this decision. Murad supports ERSP and encourages others in the advertising industry to support the self-regulatory process.”

Vascular Health Specialists Participates in ERSP Forum: ERSP Finds Support for Certain Claims; Recommends Marketer Modify Testimonials

New York, NY – July 7 – The Electronic Retailing Self-Regulation Program (ERSP) has determined that Vascular Health Specialists (VHS) provided adequate support for performance claims made in direct-response advertising for Rosadyn.

ERSP, the electronic direct-response industry’s self-regulatory forum, is administered by the Council of Better Business Bureaus (CBBB) with policy oversight by the National Advertising Review Council (NARC).

The marketer’s advertising came to the attention of ERSP pursuant to an anonymous consumer complaint.

ERSP reviewed online advertising for Rosadyn, and identified several claims for review, including:

Performance Claims

• “Rosadyn is an advanced non-prescription oral nutraceutical that targets facial redness, facial flushing, skin inflammation, and ocular rosacea.”
• “The Vascular Support Blend has been shown to repair damaged skin vessel walls and protect blood vessels from free radical and inflammatory damage”
• “Individually, these ingredients have been shown to mitigate inflammation, inhibit free radical formation, reduce skin redness and thicken and moisturize the skin from the inside-out.”
• “The Hypothalamus Support Blend includes ingredients which have been shown to lower stress and anxiety responses in the brain, resulting in a naturally calming effect that produces relaxation without drowsiness.”

ERSP was also concerned about the omission of material information in testimonials regarding the generally expected product performance.

At the outset of the inquiry, VHS informed ERSP that many of the claims that were subject of the initial inquiry were part of a test marketing website that is no longer available. As such, ERSP reviewed the four remaining nationally disseminated claims.

Rosadyn, a nutraceutical that targets facial redness, facial flushing, skin inflammation, and ocular rosacea, includes a proprietary formula containing a variety of ingredients. The marketer provided ERSP with more than fifty studies that it asserted would demonstrate the efficacy of individual ingredients found in Rosadyn. Following its review of the evidence, ERSP determined that VHS provided adequate support for its performance claims.

VHS also provided ERSP with a copy of a pilot study consisting of an online survey of 55 participants who were provided with a one-month supply of Rosadyn. The results indicated that many participants saw a decrease in rosacea-related symptoms and 83% believed the product met or exceeded expectations. A follow-up survey showed continued improvement through the six-month mark.

ERSP was concerned, however, that testimonials at the Rosadyn site could create  unsupported consumer expectations as to the performance capability of Rosadyn.

ERSP noted in its decision that, while it is not “questioning the authenticity of the testimonials, it cannot be ignored that the representations can be considered more than general or anecdotal and are not supported by virtue of subjective responses from a one-month online consumer usage study or by individual ingredient evidence.”

ERSP recommended that the marketer modify the testimonials page to ensure that testimonial claims are in compliance with the FTC’s Guides on the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising and do not create unsupported product performance expectations.

The company, in its marketer’s statement, said, “[VHS is] heartened by ERSP’s conclusion that these studies adequately supported the four key general performance claims that remain part of Rosadyn’s nationally disseminated marketing material … we are nonetheless exploring ways to best incorporate ERSP’s recommendation into the testimonial section.”