HBW Insight is part of Pharma Intelligence UK Limited

This site is operated by Pharma Intelligence UK Limited, a company registered in England and Wales with company number 13787459 whose registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. The Pharma Intelligence group is owned by Caerus Topco S.à r.l. and all copyright resides with the group.

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use. For high-quality copies or electronic reprints for distribution to colleagues or customers, please call +44 (0) 20 3377 3183

Printed By

UsernamePublicRestriction

Pharmavite Modifying Claims Challenged In Industry Self-Regulation Rapid Review

Executive Summary

In response to Church & Dwight’s Single Well-defined Issue Fast Track challenge at NAD, Pharmavite modifies “clinically proven absorption” claims for Nature Made Multi Complete, Prenatal Multi + DHA Softgels, and Prenatal Gummies by disclosing nutrients clinically tested.

You may also be interested in...



Vitafusion ‘Clinically Proven Absorption’ Claim Fails In C&D Appeal Of Industry Self-Regulation Review

Church & Dwight will comply with National Advertising Review Board decision to discontinue claim for vitafusion supplements. The panel rejected C&D’s argument that any amount of vitamin absorption is “clinically meaningful” and deferred to the National Advertising Division on C&D’s procedural challenge.

CRN Ends Funding For Industry Self-Regulation Program Focused On Supplement Advertising

The trade group ends funding for National Advertising Division program launched in 2006 for increased focus on monitoring supplement claims, reviewing 360 in total. Separately, NAD launches an expedited challenge process aiming to conclude reviews in 20 business days.

Vitafusion Absorption Claim Review May Touch Supplement Industry Nerve About Disclosures

Council of Better Business Bureaus division, reviewing Pharmavite challenge, found Church & Dwight doesn't support or sufficiently qualify “clinically proven absorption” claims for vitafusion vitamin C and D3 products in a decision that swung on a corollary to an oft-cited standard for consumer health product advertising, that results of tests on separate ingredients are not relevant to claims for products.

Related Content

Topics

Related Companies

Latest Headlines
See All
UsernamePublicRestriction

Register

RS150119

Ask The Analyst

Ask the Analyst is free for subscribers.  Submit your question and one of our analysts will be in touch.

Your question has been successfully sent to the email address below and we will get back as soon as possible. my@email.address.

All fields are required.

Please make sure all fields are completed.

Please make sure you have filled out all fields

Please make sure you have filled out all fields

Please enter a valid e-mail address

Please enter a valid Phone Number

Ask your question to our analysts

Cancel