USN CreatineX4 – UK ruling

,

Posted 18 March 2015

While researching UK ASA rulings, we came across this 2009 ruling against USN for the product “CreatineX4 New generation Creatine Ethyl Ester”. A complainant challenged the claims:

1. “Studies have shown that this form of creatine is up to 400% more effective than ordinary creatine” and
2. “CreatineX4 is unmatched in its ability to boost training intensity and recovery”.

The ASA concluded that, in the absence of sound clinical evidence, the claims “Studies have shown that this form of creatine is up to 400% more effective than ordinary creatine” and “CreatineX4 is unmatched in its ability to boost training intensity and recovery” were misleading. The ad breached CAP Code Substantiation, Truthfulness, Fair comparison and Health and beauty.

That was 2009 – yet South African consumers are still being scammed: On the Mkem website, the following statement (supplied by USN) is being made “400% more effective than other forms of creatine.” Although not stated on USN’s website, in the Google search tagline, “unmatched in its ability to boost training intensity and recover” is still visible.USN Crea-X4

 

7.4 Upheld Complaint against USN

ADVERTISER : USN (UK) Ltd
Unit L8
Andoversford Industrial Estate
Station Road
Andoversford
Gloucestershire
GL54 4LB

http://asa.org.uk/~/media/Files/ASA/Reports/ASA_Compliance_Health_Beauty_2006.ashx

MEDIUM : Magazine

PUBLIC COMPLAINT : Cleveland

COMPLAINT:

Objection to a magazine ad, for a sports nutrition supplement, that stated

“CreatineX4 New generation Creatine Ethyl Ester”. The complainant challenged the

claims:

1. “Studies have shown that this form of creatine is up to 400% more effective than

ordinary creatine” and

2. “CreatineX4 is unmatched in its ability to boost training intensity and recovery”.

(Ed 11: 3.1; 7.1; 19.1; 50.1)

ADJUDICATION:

1. & 2. Complaint upheld USN (UK) Ltd said their product was creatine monohydrate that had been chemically modified to have an ester attached to its molecular structure; they believed that meant their product would be absorbed up to four times better than ordinary creatine. However, USN were unable to provide robust evidence in the form of clinical trials on humans to support the claims.

The ASA concluded that, in the absence of sound clinical evidence, the claims “Studies have shown that this form of creatine is up to 400% more effective than ordinary creatine” and “CreatineX4 is unmatched in its ability to boost training intensity and recovery” were misleading. We welcomed USN’s willingness to amend their ad and told them to contact the CAP Copy Advice team for help with future ads.

The ad breached CAP Code clauses 3.1 (Substantiation), 7.1 (Truthfulness), 19.1 (Fair comparison) and 50.1 (Health and beauty).

[note note_color="#f6fdde" radius="4"]CamCheck posts related to USN
(Link opens in new browser window)
[/note]

,

One Response to USN CreatineX4 – UK ruling

  1. Roy 18 March, 2015 at 6:29 pm #

    USN-UK has the same origins as USN-SA:

    “The exciting journey of USN started back in 1999 when owner Albé Geldenhuys, a mountain bike enthusiast, formed Ultimate Sports Nutrition, with the promise to develop and deliver only the most advanced sports nutrition (sic) to those of any discipline, in any sport, with any goal.”

    http://uk.usn-sport.com/w/en/about-us/

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.