NAD Recommends Cosmederm Bioscience Discontinue Challenged Claims for TriCalm Anti-Itch Product

Editor’s Note: This press release was revised 10.28.15 to reflect Cosmederm’s decision to withdraw its appeal to the National Advertising Review Board. It reflects Cosmederm’s revised  advertiser’s statement.

New York, NY –  June 23, 2015  – The National Advertising Division has recommended that Cosmederm Bioscience, Inc., discontinue advertising claims for the company’s TriCalm over-the-counter (OTC) anti-itch product, following a challenge by Chattem, Inc., the maker of Cortizone-10, an external analgesic formulated with hydrocortisone 1%.

NAD is an investigative unit of the advertising industry’s system of self-regulation. It is administered by the Council of Better Business Bureaus.

NAD reviewed express claims that included:

  • “Most over the counter topical itch relievers don’t give you the relief you need.”
  • “Five times more effective than 1% hydrocortisone at reducing itch.”
  • “5X MORE EFFECTIVE than hydrocortisone 1% at reducing itch.*   *Head-to-head comparison of Topical Hydrocortisone 1% and TriCalm in a cowhage-induced itch model.  Data on file.”
  • “Dermatologist Recommended” in close proximity to “for itching, burning and stinging.”

NAD also considered whether the advertising at issue implied that:

  • Hydrocortisone products do not provide effective itch relief,
  • TriCalm is five times more effective at relieving all itches relieved by hydrocortisone 1%.
  • An adequate and well-controlled survey of dermatologists confirms that TriCalm is recommended for treating all itching, burning and stinging, including all itching, burning and stinging associated with minor skin irritations.

The challenged television commercial featured Chuck Woolery, former game show host, who said that “as we age, itchy skin gets worse.  And most topical itch relievers don’t give you the itch relief you need.  So get steroid-free TriCalm for fast itch relief.  TriCalm is five times more effective than hydrocortisone 1% at reducing itch … if you have dry, itchy skin, relieve it with guaranteed TriCalm.”

Two radio advertisements made similar claims, although one focused on “summer itches” and the other addressed “dry, itchy, winter skin.”

The challenged Internet advertisement featured a package of TriCalm to the left of which appears the language, in large type, “5X MORE EFFECTIVE,” and below, in smaller type, “than hydrocortisone 1% at reducing itch.”* The disclaimer appears below the product packaging: “*Head-to-head comparison of Topical Hydrocortisone 1% and TriCalm in a cowhage-induced itch model.  Data on file.”

NAD determined that the challenged advertisements reasonably conveyed the message that TriCalm is 5X more effective than hydrocortisone 1% at reducing many different kinds of itches hydrocortisone is intended to treat, particularly for an aging population and for itches that occur during the summer and winter months. NAD determined, however, that the advertiser’s evidence didn’t support the challenged claims. For example, NAD noted in its decision, the product was not tested according to consumer-use directions and was tested on itches that were induced, as opposed to naturally occurring. In addition, neither of the key studies offered by the advertiser tested older populations or was conducted during the winter.

Following its review of the evidence in the record, NAD recommended that the advertiser discontinue the challenged claims. The company, in its advertiser’s statement, said that it “respectfully disagrees with NAD’s opinion in its entirety and is deeply disappointed in the conclusions reached.”

Cosmederm, in its revised advertiser’s statement, said the following: “Although Cosmederm respectfully disagrees with the conclusions reached by NAD and unequivocally believes all of the challenged claims are fully substantiated by the clinical studies it provided on the product itself, Cosmederm hereby withdraws its appeal of NAD’s decision. In the spirit of promoting the self-regulatory process, Cosmederm will keep NAD’s recommendations in mind when developing future advertising. Cosmederm thanks NAD and NARB for its role in the advertising self-regulatory process.”


 

Subscribe to the Ad Law Insights or Privacy Initiatives newsletters for an exclusive monthly analysis and insider perspectives on the latest trends and case decisions in advertising law and data privacy.

 

 

 

 

Latest Decisions

Decision

National Advertising Division Recommends Blueprint Test Preparation Discontinue Certain MCAT Score Improvement Claims

New York, NY – April 22, 2024 – The National Advertising Division recommended Blueprint Test Preparation discontinue certain express and implied claims made in connection with its four MCAT preparation courses, including claims that Blueprint students raise their MCAT scores by 15 or 13 points on average.

Read the Decision Summary
Decision

National Advertising Division Recommends The Princeton Review Discontinue Point Increase Claims for MCAT Test Preparation Services

New York, NY – April 18, 2024 – In a Fast-Track SWIFT challenge, the National Advertising Division recommended that The Princeton Review (TPR) discontinue claims that its students “Score a 515+ on the MCAT or add 15 points depending on your starting score. Guaranteed or your money back.”

Read the Decision Summary
Decision

Direct Selling Self-Regulatory Council Recommends Trades of Hope Discontinue Salesforce Member Earnings Claims

McLean, VA – April 17, 2024 – The Direct Selling Self-Regulatory Council (DSSRC) recommended that Trades of Hope discontinue certain earnings claims made by salesforce members on Facebook and YouTube. 

Read the Decision Summary
Decision

National Advertising Division Recommends Lily of the Desert Nutraceuticals Discontinue “100% Pure Avocado Oil” Claim for Tropical Plantation Avocado Oil

New York, NY – April 15, 2024 – The National Advertising Division recommended that Lily of the Desert Nutraceuticals discontinue the claim “100% Pure Avocado Oil” for its Tropical Plantation Avocado Oil and avoid conveying the unsupported message that the product is 100% pure avocado...

Read the Decision Summary