NAD Recommends Prestige Discontinue Certain Claims for ‘Little Remedies’ Products, Finds Product Name is Not Misleading
New York, NY – March 12, 2015 – The National Advertising Division has recommended that Prestige Brands Holdings, Inc., discontinue certain advertising claims for two of the company’s “Little Remedies” products formulated with honey. However, NAD determined that the advertiser could support a challenged claim made for Little Remedies Honey Cough Syrup and found that the products’ name – Little Remedies – was not misleading.
NAD is an investigative unit of the advertising industry’s system of self-regulation. It is administered by the Council of Better Business Bureaus.
The claims at issue – which appeared in broadcast and Internet advertising, on social media channels and on labeling – were challenged by Pfizer Consumer Healthcare. Pfizer argued that the advertiser made health-related claims for the child-directed products, which include Little Remedies Honey Cough Syrup, Little Remedies Honey Pops, and Little Remedies Cough and Immune Support.
In response to NAD’s inquiry, Prestige said that some of the challenged claims had been discontinued prior to NAD’s inquiry. Further, the company said, it had discontinued its Soothing Cough Syrup and Honey Elixir products, stopped using the phrase “Safe and Effective” on its Honey Cough Syrup and changed the language on its Cough + Immune Support product to state “support immune system,” rather than “boost immune system.”
In this case, the advertiser offered five studies aimed at assessing the effects of honey on children’s nighttime coughs. NAD noted that the while the studies varied with respect to certain methodological features, including the type of honey studied and the number and ages of the subjects, all of them sought to assess nighttime coughing by asking parents to answer a questionnaire addressing the frequency and severity of their children’s nighttime coughing.
NAD determined that the studies, taken together, demonstrated honey’s efficacy in mitigating cough frequency and severity – an outcome that could be fairly described as “soothing” and/or “calming.” Furthermore, NAD found that these findings were further bolstered by the many physicians, hospitals, and expert bodies that have relied on these studies or otherwise endorsed the use of honey for coughs.
NAD next considered whether honey’s demonstrated efficacy as a soother and calmer of coughs could be extended to Prestige’s Little Remedies honey-containing products.
The challenger argued against extrapolation, noting its concern that Prestige provided ingredient studies – rather than studies that were conducted on the Little Remedies products themselves.
NAD noted in its decision that while it generally requires advertisers to provide studies that were conducted on the products themselves to support product performance claims, it has carved out an exception for products which are “essentially the key ingredient.”
Following its review of the evidence, NAD determined that Prestige had provided a reasonable basis for the claim that its Little Remedies Honey Cough Syrup – formulated with only honey, water and a preservative – soothes and calms coughs.
However, NAD determined that honey’s effect on coughs could not be assumed to extend to sore throats and colds. NAD recommended that the advertiser discontinue its claims that its Honey Cough Syrup – or any other Little Remedies honey-containing product – soothes or calms sore throats or relive cold symptoms.
Further, NAD found that Prestige’s Honey Pops and its Cough + Immune Support are not “essentially” honey. NAD recommended the advertiser discontinue claims that its Honey Pops and Cough + Immune Support products “calm” or “soothe” either throats or coughs.
Finally, NAD determined that there was no basis to conclude that the “Little Remedies” brand name is misleading.
Prestige, in its advertiser’s statement, took issue with certain of NAD’s findings, but said the company would take NAD’s recommendations into consideration in future revisions to its labeling and packaging.
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
National Advertising Division Refers “Made in USA” Claims by Larose Industries d/b/a Roseart and Cra-Z-Art to the Federal Trade Commission
New York, NY – January 10, 2025 – The National Advertising Division referred advertising claims by Larose Industries, operating under the names Roseart and Cra-Z-Art, that its products are “Made in USA” to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) after Larose Industries failed to respond to the inquiry.
National Advertising Division Recommends T-Mobile Discontinue or Modify 20% Savings vs. ‘The Other Big Guys’ Claim; T-Mobile to Appeal
New York, NY – January 9, 2025 – The National Advertising Division recommended that T-Mobile discontinue or modify its advertising to avoid conveying the comparative claim that consumers can “save 20% every month vs. the other big guys” if they subscribe to T-Mobile in markets where Spectrum Mobile also...
In National Advertising Division Fast-Track SWIFT Challenge Behr Voluntarily Discontinues “No Comparable Product” Claim
New York, NY – January 8, 2025 – In a National Advertising Division Fast-Track SWIFT challenge brought by Benjamin Moore, Behr voluntarily discontinued its “No Comparable Product” claim.
National Advertising Division Finds Charter’s “Unlimited” Claims Supported; Recommends Clear & Conspicuous Speed Limitation Disclosures
New York, NY – January 7, 2025 – The National Advertising Division found that Charter substantiated certain express and implied claims about its Spectrum Mobile “Unlimited” and “Unlimited Plus” wireless data plans but recommended that Charter modify its website advertising to disclose high speed data...