In the article “Checking on Supplements: NAD’s Recent Guidance on Substantiating Ingredient vs. Product Claims,” attorneys Jonathan Hyman, Kate McMorrow, and Zoe Vikstrom examine a recent National Advertising Division (NAD) decision that illustrates the potential pitfalls companies can encounter when promoting a health product.
The article discusses the NAD’s decision concerning Happy Mammoth’s promotion of a dietary supplement product that it claimed addressed various symptoms of menopause. In response to the NAD proceeding, Happy Mammoth discontinued some of its claims but attempted to defend others. Ultimately, the NAD issued a decision recommending that Happy Mammoth discontinue all of the challenged claims because they were not sufficiently substantiated with respect to either the product or ingredients.
According to the authors, the decision “provides useful new guidance or, in the advertiser’s words, ‘novel critiques’ for substantiating health product claims.” The authors offer recommendations for companies seeking to avoid similar challenges to their advertising claims:
- Limit the claim to the product or specific ingredient studied.
- Match your evidence to your product formulation, dosage, method of administration, and target population.
- Rely on conclusive studies that are accepted in the field, specify the symptom improved, and avoid “soft statements” that a product or ingredient “may” cause a desired result.
Read the full article here.
