ERSP Reviews Advertising For Malegard, Marketed By Lifespan Health Products

New York, NY – July 19, 2007 – The Electronic Retailing Self -Regulation Program (ERSP) has determined that Lifespan Health Products has provided adequate support for the general product performance claims   for   the   Malegard   prostate   dietary    supplement, but   recommended establishment  claims  for the product  be  modified.  The marketer’s  advertising  was brought to ERSP’s attention through its ongoing monitoring program.

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).

Claims at issue in the ERSP inquiry included:

• “Survey of over 500 men in 2005 and 2006 support the effectiveness.”
• “2006  Survey  Results:  87%  of  men  had  positive  results;  Proven  to  lower  PSA; Reduce your risk of prostate cancer; Live healthier with Malegard.”
• “Reduces the risk of prostate cancer.” “Improvement in urination control.”
• “Used by physicians as well as other professionals.”

ERSP  noted  that  during  the  pendancy  of  the  inquiry  the  marketer  voluntarily  made  several changes to the product Website.

Following its review of the evidence, ERSP  recommended  that any unqualified claims that are based on the results of the consumer survey  should be modified to disclose that the survey was limited  to consumers  who  were  using  the  product  at the  time  and  to identify  which  prostate conditions reportedly improved.

ERSP determined that the marketer  should disclose on both the Website and in the streaming video that many survey respondents also were taking prescription drugs for heart problems and/or prostate  enlargement.  ERSP further recommended  that the marketer   list the specific  questions asked of the respondents and activate the “Survey Results” hyper-link on the product Website.

ERSP concluded that, with respect to general product performance claims, the marketer presented adequate  support for its claims  that the product  “may assist” or “may be helpful” in reducing prostate cancer and urination control but concluded that definitive or categorical assertions  such as “cuts risk of prostate cancer” regarding product efficacy should be modified.