USN 19 TESTO MASS – ASA ruling

Posted 07 May 2014

USN claimed that this product is an “Ergogenic aid” and “Testo Booster”. A complaint was laid claiming that these claims are not justified and cannot be proved to be true.

USN responded by saying that the claims would be removed from the website and the product.

17 Apr 2014

http://www.asasa.org.za/ResultDetail.aspx?Ruling=6852

Dr Steinman lodged a consumer complaint against a USN internet advertisement promoting its 19-Testo Mass product. The advertisement was published at www.usn.co.za/product/hardcore/testosterone-boosters/19testo-mass-112.html.

It contains a photograph of the advertised product’s packaging as well as a brief description. Under the title “BENEFITS”, it lists “Ergogenic aid” and “Testo Booster”.

COMPLAINT

The complainant submitted, in essence, that the claims are not supported by studies in humans and are therefore misleading to average consumers about the product. He outlined the research conducted to support his allegations.

RELEVANT CLAUSE OF THE CODE OF ADVERTISING PRACTICE

The complainant identified Clause 4.1 of Section II (Substantiation) as relevant.

RESPONSE

The respondent explained that recent amendments to the Medicines Act were published in November 2014. As a result of these, it has already had to amend its packaging pending registration with the MCC. The claims have also been removed from its marketing material, including its website, until the product is registered with the Medicines Control Council.

ASA DIRECTORATE RULING

The ASA Directorate considered all the relevant documentation submitted by the respective parties.

In terms of the Code and a long-standing principle held in previous rulings, the Directorate has discretion in terms of deciding whether or not an unequivocal undertaking to remove or amend the advertising complained of is an adequate resolution to the matter.

The respondent’s confirmation that “… all the claims have been removed from packaging …” and that “The claims are also being removed from marketing material (including website) …” appears to address the complainants’ concerns and there is therefore no need for the Directorate to consider the merits of the matter at this time.

The undertaking is accepted on condition that the claims in question are not used again in future in their current format, or at least not until approved and registered by the MCC.

It should be noted that at the time of ruling, the respondent’s website still listed “Ergogenic aid” under “BENEFITS” and featured this description at the top of its page. It also still describes the product as a “TESTOSTERONE BOOSTER” at the top and bottom of its page. If the respondent wishes to avoid a potential finding of breach against it, it should ensure that these claims, which were specifically objected to by the complainant, are removed within two weeks from the date of this ruling.

[note note_color=”#f6fdde” radius=”4″]CamCheck posts related to USN 

• Can You Get Too Much Protein? 15 September, 2021
• SLAPPing back: Court checks corporate bullying 12 February, 2021
• Sports nutrition position paper backs dietary protein over supplements 28 August, 2020
• South African Whey and Casein protein powders lack important amino acids 7 November, 2019
• USN PhedraCut Lipo XT recalled due to high caffeine content 18 September, 2019
• UK ASA rules claims of USN Phedracut breach advertising code 6 August, 2019
• Sports nutrition: spoiled by ‘wrong and immoral’ marketing 10 May, 2018
• Protein World’s Carb Blocker versus USN Carb Block 22 March, 2018
• 5 supplements that claim to speed up weight loss – and what the science says 31 January, 2018
• Why do teenagers use supplements, and where do they get their advice? 27 November, 2017
• 3 Bodybuilding Supplements That Are An Absolute Waste Of Money 16 October, 2017
• Denmark warns over online sports supplements 2 July, 2017
• Sports nutrition growth spoiled by ‘wrong and immoral’ marketing 28 June, 2017
• Sports supplements sold to children 12 May, 2017
• Garcinia Linked to Liver Damage 1 May, 2017
• Teens Receiving Inaccurate Information on Supplements 19 April, 2017
• Court strikes blow against quackery 17 March, 2017
• Some good reasons to be cautious about using dietary supplements 13 February, 2017
• Protein hype: shoppers flushing money down the toilet, say experts 28 December, 2016
• Muscle-building shakes don’t always have as much protein as they claim to 11 July, 2016
• Targeting school children in marketing campaigns for sports supplements: Is it ethical? 31 May, 2016
• USN linked to company promoting sport supplements in children 21 April, 2016
• Diet supplements threat to liver 25 January, 2016
• Power Report: Watchdog in chains as advertiser fights back 18 November, 2015
• USN’s defamation action: Commentary on RSG 21 October, 2015
• Supplement use might be a sign of disordered eating in men 8 October, 2015
• Die Burger: Aktivis gedagvaar oor aanvullers 7 October, 2015
• USN, Herbex, Antagolin, Solal and Vigro (Nativa) go to court to block ASA 6 October, 2015
• USN: Previous ASA rulings 5 October, 2015
• USN defamation charge against CamCheck 17 September, 2015
• Do sports drinks and energy bars make you a better athlete? 15 September, 2015
• CLA supplement linked to hepatitis case 14 September, 2015
• USN/Evox Protein supplements: what you need to know 26 August, 2015
• Melamine contamination in South African nutritional supplements 21 July, 2015
• USN Carb Binder – ASA breach ruling 7 May, 2015
• Nutritech Diet Meal vs USN – ASA Ruling 5 May, 2015
• Nutritech Premium Pure Whey Lite vs USN – ASA Ruling 4 May, 2015
• Muscle-Building Supplements Linked to Testicular Cancer 22 April, 2015
• Study finds troubling link between use of muscle-building supplements and cancer 14 April, 2015
• MedicalBrief: Fat Blocker moves to silence fact checker 29 March, 2015
• UK ASA acts against USN product claims 26 March, 2015
• New consumer site casts doubt on (USN) supplement claims 24 March, 2015
• USN issues a ‘Take-down’ notice for CamCheck 18 March, 2015
• USN CreatineX4 – UK ruling 18 March, 2015
• USN ‘Carb binder’ – the scam continues 10 February, 2015
• White kidney bean extract for weight loss? 29 January, 2015
• Albe Geldenhuys / USN responds to CamCheck posting 26 January, 2015
• Oxygen myths that refuse to die 18 November, 2014
• USN 100% Whey Protein 13 October, 2014
• USN Fat Block – Fat chance 3 October, 2014
• USN Phedra-Cut Lipo XT – ASA breach ruling 2 October, 2014
• Anti-Doping Agency warns athletes about dietary supplements 11 August, 2014
• USN 19-Testo Mass – ASA ruling 28 July, 2014
• USN “Carb Binder” – scam product, ASA ruling 28 July, 2014
• USN 19 TESTO MASS – ASA ruling 9 May, 2014
• Albe Geldenhuys of USN, a master scam artist? 9 March, 2014
• Biogen Tribulus – ASA Santions – 31 January 2014 31 January, 2014
• Biogen Testoforte: ASA ruling – website advert 10 November, 2013
• Biogen Testoforte: ASA ruling – print advert 10 November, 2013
• Biogen Tribulus – ASA Breach ruling – 8 November 2013 8 November, 2013
• USN Pure Protein Bar – ASA ruling 10 October, 2013
• Biogen Tribulus – ASA ruling – 11 September 2013 11 September, 2013
• USN Phedra-Cut Hardcore – ASA Ruling 10 June, 2013
• USN Fat Block – Lie, no proof that it blocks fat 7 May, 2013
• USN Phedra-Cut LipoXT product – ASA ruling 7 April, 2013
• USN Weight loss product’s claims are ‘misleading’ 4 February, 2013
• USN Phedra-Cut Hardcore – No proof! 17 January, 2013
• USN Phedra-Cut Lipo XT – ASA ruling 1 August, 2012
• Biogen Andrenal Boost nonsense 12 August, 2011
• Protein supplements give no benefit to athlete’s performance 10 July, 2011
• USN Cellu-Firm – ASA Sanctions – 15 July 2009 15 July, 2009
• USN Cellu-Firm – ASA Breach ruling – 8 June 2009 8 June, 2009
• USN Cellu-Firm – ASA Sanctions – 16 October 2008 16 October, 2008
• USN Cellu-Firm – ASA Breach ruling – 8 April 2008 8 April, 2008
• USN Cellu-Firm – ASA breach ruling – 02 April 2007 2 April, 2007
• USN Cellu-Firm – ASA ruling November 2006 28 November, 2006