Solal Nutritional Supplements – ASA ruling

Posted 30 November 2012

This complaint regarding Solal’s  “Nutritional supplements to help diabetics” was dismissed by the ASA with the  comment: “Given the requirements for clear and concise grounds in the Code, and in keeping with the approach followed in the Nature’s Choice ruling referred to above, the Directorate has to decline to rule on the merits of this matter at this time, based on the complaint at hand.” 

Read the rest

Solal has bitter pill to swallow as ASA rules on anti-ageing claims

Posted 28 November 2012

By Wendy Knowler

The Star November 28 2012 at 09:00am

The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) has ordered Solal Technologies, a South African company professing to be “leaders in anti-ageing, integrative and preventative medicine”, to stop making misleading claims about several of its key products.

In hearings held earlier this month, the ASA found the company had failed to provide adequate substantiation for some of its claims.

In the case of Solal’s Anti-Aging Pill, the company has been ordered to stop using the name of the product, as it was unable, in the Directorate’s view, to provide evidence to back up the expectation that the name creates in consumers’ minds.

Read the rest

Public duped by risky diet pills

Posted 28 November 2012

Last updated: Tuesday, November 27, 2012
Dr IV van Heerden, DietDoc

Every year, the SA market is flooded with weight-loss products that contain prohibited substances. Companies continue to make more money while the public continue to get duped and exposed to severe risks, writes DietDoc.

Read the rest

Ad watchdog gives Easy Thin a fat klap

Posted 28 November 2012

By Wendy Knowler

IOL  January 11 2012 at 05:19pm 

If you overindulged during the festive season and made one of those “lose weight/get fit” new year resolutions, you’ll be particularly vulnerable to the marketing ploys of the slimming product and fitness club industries.

Read the rest

Five celebrity fad diets to avoid

Posted 26 November 2012

By Louise Eccles
November 23 2012 at 03:30pm 

London – One recommends sitting in a cold bath after drinking black coffee, while another involves being fed through an intravenous drip.

They are among the top five celebrity fad diets that experts have warned should be avoided in the New Year.

The British Dietetic Association (BDA) said that diets followed by the rich and famous were becoming “more extreme” and increasingly involved “medical intervention”.

Dieticians warned there really is “no quick fix” to a slim, trim body for 2013 and said that following celebrity fads could lead to health problems.

Read the rest

Phenolphthalein (banned) found in LeanGenie product

Posted 20 November 2012

Phenolphthalein (banned in South Africa for safety concerns) and sibutramine has been found in the LeanGenie product, JS Slim-weight-loss capsules, and in Lifestyle Tradelink’s Fruit & Vegetables-capsules.  

Read the rest

Solal HIV/AIDS Protocol – ASA complaint

Posted 20 November 2012

A consumer took issue in a complaint to the ASA with the individual claims made for each individual component of this product, taking issue with the validity of these claims. In addition, whether or not there was any evidence to support the respondent’s inclusion of each individual component in its “HIV / AIDS SUPPORT” protocol was argued and effectively, the concerns to whether or not there was appropriate evidence that the respondent’s entire “HIV / AIDS SUPPORT” regime is able to deliver on expectations.

The ASA ruled in favour of Solal stating that in their opinion, that: ‘the hypothetical “reasonable person” would likely interpret this advertising communication to mean that this particular protocol is meant to offer “support” to people living with HIV / AIDS. There is nothing before the Directorate to show that people would interpret this to imply that the relevant protocol would treat Read the rest

Solal Anti-Aging Pill – ASA ruling – No evidence

Posted 19 November 2012

A consumer laid a complaint with the ASA against the claims for this product. A number of claims were made, and in particular, that this product (The Anti-Aging Pill), can have an impact on aging. A previous deconstruction on CamCheck of this product, showed that the claims were extrapolated from worms, rats, mice and not based on human studies. The ASA evaluated the evidence supplied by Solal and found that the evidence was insufficient to substantiate the claims.

This ruling is particularly important for:

  1. Solal have used ad hominem attacks on the complainant (An ad hominem (Latin for “to the man”), short for argumentum ad hominem, is an argument made personally against an opponent, instead of against the opponent’s argument.[1])
  2. In this ruling, the ASA (non-scientifically trained) were able to discern that the evidence that Solal put forward (scientifically trained) were non supported by
Read the rest

Solal “Naturally High” – ASA complaint not accepted

Posted 19 November 2012

A consumer laid two complaints with the ASA against the claims for this product. The ASA ruled in favour of the complainant in that complaint but not in this one, stating: “Given the requirements for clear and concise grounds in the Code . . .  the Directorate has to decline to rule on the merits of this matter at this time, based on the complaint at hand”. 

Read the rest

Solal “Naturally High” – no proof of efficacy offered

Posted 16 November 2012

A consumer complaint was laid with the ASA against Solal’s internet advertising promoting “Naturally High”. The product claims that it is “… a blend of safe, herbal and nutritional extracts that naturally elevate the levels of three energising and mood-enhancing brain neuro-transmitters …” and that this product “… enhances the brain’s ability to cope with stress and has an anti-anxiety effect by calming the central nervous system” and that “Unlike prescription anti-depressants, Naturally High doesn’t artificially and dangerously prevent the breakdown of neurotransmitters, which can lead to agitation, sleep disturbances, reduced sex-drive, suicidal thoughts, and aggression”.

The complainant submitted that the respondent’s website provides no evidence for these claims, and that they have little scientific basis. 

The ASA ruled partly in favour of the complainant, i.e., they were not offered any proof that the product could support the claims being made for it. 

 … Read the rest