Categories

ASA Ruling: Echinaforce

A complainant, lodged a complaint regarding a newsprint advertisement for Echinaforce which appeared in the Sunday Times on 27 February 2011, and also about a similar advertisement for the same product on the website, www.sanatural.co.za, which, according to the complainant, repeated and expanded on these claims.

In essence, It was submitted, inter alia, that the website still claims, “Dr Alfred Vogel’s Echinaforce inhibits bird flu (H5N1), swine flu (H1N1), seasonal flu more effective than oseltamivir!” and “In the first round, effective against 97,85% of the viruses”.

… Read the rest
May 4th, 2011 | Tags: , , , | Category: ASA (SA) Rulings | Leave a comment

Vogel’s Echinaforce

A consumer laid a complaint with the ASA against Vogel’s Echinaforce advert. The advertorial was headed, “A. Vogel Echinaforce proven in-vitro to inhibit Swine Flu, Bird Flu and Seasonal Flu”. The advertorial contained, inter alia, the claim “in the first round Echinaforce was effective against 97.85% of the viruses”. Reference is also made to Echinaforce’s prophylactic and antibacterial qualities.

In essence, the complainant submitted that the advertorial is misleading as the product is not registered with the authorities in any way. She also contested the validity of the claim that the product is able to protect against, inter alia, Swine Flu, arguing that this study has not been subjected to any form of peer review. 

How did the ASA rule?

… Read the rest
August 20th, 2010 | Tags: , , , , | Category: ASA (SA) Rulings | Leave a comment