ASCI bans 200 ads in October 2017; Healthcare, Education sector tops list of banned ads
The Consumer Complaints Council (CCC) of the Advertising Standards Council of India (ASCI) has banned as many as 200 advertisements out of 319 complaints it received across segments during October 2017.  
 
Out of 319 advertisements against which complaints were upheld, 82 belonged to the Healthcare category, 75 to the Education category, followed by eight in the Food & Beverages category, 11 in the Personal Care category, and 24 advertisements from other categories, the self-regulatory industry body said in a statement.
 
Gross exaggeration of product efficacy was the number one reason for upholding complaints, followed by violation of the Drugs and Magic Remedies Act (DMR Act) and the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules (D&C Rules). The other reasons were failure to provide substantial facts and figures to support claims, and providing misleading and ambiguous information.
 
Among the various complaints, CCC observed that a prominent FMCG drug company was providing inadequate and misleading information on its products while promoting pimple free skin in their campaign.  Similarly, an MNC had magnified information regarding the services provided to the public and its association with an international sports event. Both the claims were not substantiated with supporting data and were found to be inaccurate. Furthermore, claims by an online car rental service brand providing discounts and offers on its services were found to be misleading by omission of validity of the promotion period. 
 
“Complaints against brands from various sectors have been upheld for not abiding by the codes of self-regulation put forth by ASCI. ASCI ensures protection to consumers against brands providing false and misleading information in their advertisements, and promotes honest messaging to protect the consumers’ interest. ASCI endeavours to provide transparency to both, the brands and consumers alike.” said Abanti Sankaranarayanan, Chairman, ASCI.
 
HEALTHCARE:-
The CCC found the following claims of 13 advertisements in healthcare products or services to be either misleading or false or not adequately / scientifically substantiated and hence violating ASCI’s Code. Some of the health care products or services advertisements also contravened provisions of the Drugs & Magic Remedies Act (DMR Act), Drugs and Cosmetics Rules (D&C Rules) and Chapter I.1 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. Complaints against the following advertisements were UPHELD.
 
1. Meck Pharmaceuticals and Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. (Glucomeck Ayurvedic): The advertisement’s claims (in Gujarati) as translated into English, “Those having difficulty in walking can also run”, and “Effective in joint pain”, were not substantiated with the details of the product being advertised, clinical evidence of product efficacy and are misleading by exaggeration.
 
2. Divisa Herbal Care (Dr. Ortho Oil): The advertisement’s claims (in Gujarati) as translated into English, “So effective that now pain will also bend its knees”, “Dr. Ortho Ayurvedic Oil is made of 8 excellent Ayurvedic oils, which enters the joints and helps in getting relief from the pain”, “Due to it being Ayurvedic its effect remains for a long time”, “Unmatched medicine for joint pain”, “It gives relief in cervical pain, knee pain, waist pain and shoulder pain”, and Javed Akhtar - Poet, lyricist, script writer says - “Dr. Ortho Ayurvedic Oil is not a temporary pain killer, it is an Ayurvedic medicine”, were not substantiated with clinical evidence of product efficacy, and are misleading by gross exaggeration. The claim “…is not a temporary pain killer” was considered to be misleading by implication that the product would cure pain. Also the advertiser did not submit any evidence that Mr. Javed Akhtar is in agreement with the claims being made in the advertisement in general. His endorsement seen in conjunction with the unsubstantiated claims is likely to mislead consumers regarding the product efficacy.
 
3. JeewanJyoti Pharmacy Pvt. Ltd. (HealthSun Ayurvedic Capsules): The advertisement’s claims, “Makes health healthy”, “Increases self-confidence”, “Ayurvedic Capsules”, “Increase body weight not fat”, “Increases hunger, increases weight”, and “Health tonic for whole family”, were not substantiated with evidence of product efficacy. The claim, “Since 25 years”, was not substantiated with supporting evidence or with third party validation.  The claims are misleading by exaggeration.
 
4. Mission Health: The advertisement’s claims, “Now to get slim is no more a dream”, “Yes, it is possible with our 4-D Slimming Clinic”, and “Lose five to seven kilograms, ten to 15 centimetres in just one month”, were not substantiated with supporting clinical evidence, and with treatment efficacy data, and are misleading by exaggeration. The visual in the advertisement implies a significant weight loss which is also grossly misleading.
 
5. Dr. Avishkar Homeopathy: The advertisement’s claim, “#Stroke is curable with homeopathy” was considered to be, prima facie, in violation of the DMR Act.
 
6. Dr. Raghubir Singh: The advertisement’s claim, “100% cure of Asthma” was considered to be, prima facie, in violation of the D&C Act.
 
7. Freshiya Health Centre: The advertisement’s claims (in Gujarati) as translated into English, “Lose weight”, “Ayurvedic method”, and “Lose seven to ten kilograms and five to seven inches from hip and stomach in 28 days”, were not substantiated with supporting clinical evidence and with treatment efficacy data, and are misleading by exaggeration.
 
8. Zee Laboratories Limited (Zee Gold Capsules): The advertisement’s claim, “India’s most liked”, was not substantiated with any verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s product and other competitive products in the same category, or through a market survey data, or through third party validation. Further the claims, “ZEE Gold Strong is a comprehensive daily health supplement that has a balanced combination of Ginseng power”, “Remove fatigue and get success”, “Strength and power of life, more stamina, keeps stress free, more energy/vigour”, and “Useful for all ages”, were not substantiated with product efficacy data.  Hence, the claims are misleading by exaggeration. The advertiser did not provide a copy of the particular award/certificate as claimed in the advertisement. Also the claim, “President Award winner”, was not substantiated with details of the award as well as references of the award such as the year, source and category for the award received. The claim is misleading by exaggeration and omission of a disclaimer to qualify this claim.   
 
9. SBS Biotech (Accumass): The advertisement’s claim, “Why only Accumass? – Because it has balanced combination of 18 special Ayurvedic herbs” and “names of 6 types of Ayurvedic herbs indicated with pictures and benefits”, were not substantiated with supporting data showing the presence of these ingredients in the product, and are misleading. Further the claims, “Ayurvedic formulation to help gain weight for all ages”, “100% Ayurvedic”, “Increase body weight not fat”, “*Gain weight according to your body capability to absorb extra calories from Accumass, results may vary”, “Don’t get upset if you are extremely thin, Accumass Ayurvedic granules and capsules are very useful in gaining weight and increasing self-confidence”, “It is a certified Ayurvedic medicine”, and “Increase weight, develop confidence”, were not substantiated with product efficacy data, and are misleading by exaggeration. Also, the claim, “Awarded as World’s Greatest Brand 2015-16 by IUA and Most Trusted Brand of Asia by World Brand Summit”, was not substantiated with a copy of the award/certificate as claimed, the details of the process as to how the selection was done i.e. survey methodology, details of survey data, criteria used for evaluation, questionnaires used, names of similar competitive products that were part of the survey, the outcome of the survey. Moreover, the credibility and authenticity and name of the certifying body was not provided by the advertiser.  The claim is misleading by exaggeration.
 
10. Lifespan Wellness Pvt. Ltd. (Lifespan Diabetes Clinics): The advertisement’s claim, “From Insulin to No Insulin – the life story of Palas Panja”, was not substantiated with supporting clinical evidence. The claims made are based on the case study of Palas Panja, implying cure for diabetes which are misleading by gross exaggeration and exploits consumers’ lack of experience and knowledge. Also the claim on the advertisement headline, “From Insulin to No Insulin” implies complete cure for Diabetes via treatement with tablets at Lifespan Clinic which is in breach of the law as it violated the DMR Act and the D&C Act.
 
11. Juvenor Pharmaceuticals (Muslinites Gold Capsules): The advertisement’s claim, “The product is helpful in increasing your power and excitement which will fill your life with happiness,” was considered to be, prima facie, in violation of the DMR Act. Further the visual in the advertisement read in conjunction with the claims objected to imply that the product is meant for enhancement of sexual pleasure. 
 
12. Sai Clinic: The advertisement’s claim, “Cures obesity without diet or medicine” was considered to be, prima facie, in violation of the DMR Act. 
 
13. Soliel International Healthcare Products (BT-36 Body Toner Capsules and Cream): The advertisement’s claims, “It is an Ayurvedic medicine which includes body toner capsule and cream which helps in beautiful thoughts and abundant self-confidence with no side-effect” with recommendation to have three capsules every day and massage twice a day with cream for 60 days, along with a disclaimer stating “Advt. is an information for R.M.P. only result may vary”, and also the product name and visual in the advertisement read in conjunction with the claims in the advertisement imply that the product is meant for breast enhancement, was all considered to be prima facie in violation of the DMR Act.
 
PERSONAL CARE:-
1. Hindustan Unilever Limited (Lever Ayush Soap): The advertisement’s claims, “Based on 5000 year old Ayurved scriptures with 15 Ayurvedic herbs – Ayush Haldi soap, Saffron soap and cow’s ghee soap” (“5000 saal puraane Ayurvedic granthon pea dharit. 15 Ayurvedic jadi butti yukt – Ayush haldi soap, Kesar soap, aur cow’s ghee soap”) were inadequately substantiated and are misleading. Also the claims, “matlab sirf hari patiyan dikhane se koi Ayurvedic nahi ban jaata, sahi Ayurvedhai Lever Ayush”, and “Dikhawe se bacho. Sahi Ayurved chuno”, by implication denigrated the entire class/category of Ayurvedic products. Furthermore, the advertiser did not submit any evidence that the celebrity is in agreement with the claims being made in the advertisement in general. The visual of the celebrity (Akshay Kumar) when seen in conjunction with the claims are likely to mislead consumers regarding the product efficacy and contravened ASCI’s Guidelines for Celebrities in Advertising.
 
2. Reckitt Benckiser (India) Pvt. Ltd. (Veet Wax Strips): The advertisement’s claim, “Removes the shortest hair that salon wax cannot”, and “Disclaimer: *Effective at removing even short (1.5mm) hair, basis clinical study performed under dermatological control. Salon wax means sugar wax”, were inadequately substantiated with objective measurement / study findings on the comparative efficacy of Veetwax strips and sugar wax.  The advertisement is misleading by omission of a disclaimer to qualify that the test is based on opinion survey of salon experts. Furthermore, the advertiser did not submit any evidence that the celebrity is in agreement with the claims being made in the advertisement in general. The visual of the celebrity (Shraddja Kapoor) when seen in conjunction with the claim “removes the shortest of hair that salon wax cannot” is likely to mislead consumers regarding the product efficacy and contravened ASCI’s Guidelines for Celebrities in Advertising.
 
3. Hamdard Laboratories (India) (Safi): The advertisement’s claims, “For pimple free skin 21 days formula” and “For pimple free skin”, were inadequately substantiated, and are misleading by exaggeration.    
 
4. Brihans Natural Products Ltd. (Green Leaf pure aloe vera skin gel): The advertisement’s claim, “India’s most trusted brand”, was not substantiated with details of the process as to how the selection was done i.e. survey methodology, details of survey data, criteria used for evaluation, questionnaires used, names of other similar institutes that were part of the survey and the outcome of the survey.  Furthermore, the award for the advertiser was among “Ayurvedic skincare products” in the year 2016, reference to which was missing in the advertisement.  Further the claim, “Unlike any cream and oil based cosmetic products, this Ayurvedic Aloe Gel naturally protects your skin”, was not substantiated with comparative data for product efficacy, of the advertiser’s product and other competitor products in the same category.  Also the claims of effects in “Acne, sunburn, rash, skin eruption and allergies, cuts and wounds” were inadequately substantiated and are misleading.
 
5. The Himalaya Drug Company (Himalaya Purifying Neem Face Wash): The advertisement’s claims, “Enough experiments with soap, creams and homemade pastes. They don’t help with your pimple problems”, “….gives you pimple-free pure skin”, and pack claim, “Prevents pimples”, were inadequately substantiated and are misleading by exaggeration.  
 
6. RICHFEEL Health & Beauty Pvt. Ltd.: The advertisement’s claim regarding efficacy being depicted via images of before and after the treatment is a misrepresentation of facts, and is misleading by gross exaggeration.
 
7. CavinKare Pvt. Ltd. (Egg White Chik Shampoo): The advertisement’s claim, “Eh damaged baloonko nourish karkehairfallkamkare”, was not substantiated and was misleading by exaggeration.    
 
8. Pfizer Ltd. (Anne French All Natural Hair Removal Cream): The advertisement’s claim, “Anne French All Natural Apnao” is misleading by ambiguity and exaggeration as the product is a chemical depilatory and it’s "all natural" nomenclature / claim in the context of Aloe Vera present is only 1% level in the product. Further for the claim, “2x softer skin” the claim support data was not considered to be acceptable to substantiate a numerical claim regarding softness. The longevity of the effect was not substantiated and the disclaimer in the advertisement was misleading by ambiguity and implication.
 
9. Dabur India Ltd. (Dabur Laal Tel): The advertisement’s claim “Dugnitezi se sharirik vikas”, was substantiated, however, this claim was valid for babies upto six months of age. There was a discrepancy in the advertisement as it showed the baby getting up and walking towards the mother and thus indicating the age to be more than six months. The additional data presented by the advertiser is about brand performance measurement and what the current users of the product “believe” regarding the product benefit. However, this data was not considered to be acceptable in absence of any scientific support for age group of six months to two years – similar to the clinical study quoted by the advertiser. The visual in the advertisement of an older baby when read in conjunction with the disclaimer claiming clinical research on babies up to six months of age, was misleading by ambiguity and implication. Also, the legibility of the disclaimers in the advertisement were not in compliance with the ASCI Guidelines for Disclaimers.
 
10. Nearbuy India Private Limited  (Golden Feather Salon): The advertisement claiming the Hair Wash + Haircut rate as Rs.250, and offering at the discounted rate of Rs.199,  when the actual original rate for the service offered is Rs.200,  is false, distorts facts and is misleading the consumers about the actual discount being offered.  
 
EDUCATION:-
The CCC found following claims in the advertisements by seven different advertisers were not substantiated and, thus, violated ASCI Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions. Hence complaints against these advertisements were UPHELD.
 
1. Liza Handwriting and Calligraphy Course: The advertisement’s claims (in Gujarati) as translated into English, “YunusBalluwala - the only expert in Ahmedabad”, “Only in five days”, and “100% Guarantee”, were not substantiated with supporting data, and are misleading by exaggeration.
 
2. Manav Rachna Educational Institutions: For the advertisement’s claim, “FMS,MRIU received A+++rating in ‘Best B-school Survey2017’ by Business India”, the data provided by the Advertiser was for the year 2016 and not 2017. Hence this claim was false and misleading.  Further for the claim, “1600+ placements in the last academic year”, the advertiser provided data for total 1366 placements.  No data was given on the number of passing out students placed for jobs, year of passed-out students, and total number of students passed out from the placed class.  Hence this claim was inadequately substantiated and is misleading by omission of the disclaimers as required under the ASCI Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs. For the claim, “17 are countries from which MREI students arrive” the advertiser provided only the name of the country as proof.  No data was given regarding the year, batch size, stream, and related details of the students.  Hence this claim was inadequately substantiated and is misleading. Also, for the claim, “40+ global collaborations” the advertiser did not provide data on (“MoU” with global universities/ institutions) for global tie-ups by the college. No details of students that got placed and passed out every year were given. The claim was inadequately substantiated and is misleading. Furthermore, for the claim, “3300+ research papers in International/ National Journals” the advertiser provided only aggregated figures of 3067 research papers. No ISSN number or publication year is mentioned in the annexure provided by the advertiser.  The claim was inadequately substantiated and is misleading. For the claim, “500+ reputed MNCs & Indian corporates patronizing us”.
 
The advertiser provided only a list of the companies. No supporting data was given to substantiate the given figure.  The claim was inadequately substantiated and is misleading. Also the claim, “25000+ is our Alumni Base”, was not substantiated with supporting data and is misleading. Lastly for the claims, “Knowledge partners - HONDA, Ed Gate, and CMA” the advertiser did not provide MOUs of these Knowledge Partners with date of execution of the MOUs.  The claim was not substantiated and is misleading.  
 
3. Allen Career Institute: The advertisement’s claim, “After AIPMT, IITJEE, NEET & Now in AIIMS, it is proved that securing AIR -1 is a tradition at Allen”, was not substantiated and is misleading by ambiguity and implication. Also the claim, “This can be achieved only with ALLEN System”, was not substantiated with verifiable comparative data, to prove that only the advertiser’s institute has been able to produce the best results. This claim was misleading by implication and exaggeration.  
 
4. Adi Shankara Institute of Engineering and Technology: The advertisement’s claim, “Moulding competent & committed professionals for the past 17 years”, was not substantiated with supporting data, and is misleading by exaggeration. Also the claim, “90% placements for the current passing out batch”, was not substantiated with authentic supporting data of the current year (2017) such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students, nor any independent audit or verification certificate.  The claim is misleading by exaggeration. Furthermore the claim, “Based on KEAM rank, attractive fee waiver scholarships for meritorious students admitted under both Govt. Allotment & Management Quota”, was not substantiated with supporting evidence of the scholarships availed by any of their students, and was misleading by implication and ambiguity regarding the amount of scholarship and the total number of scholarships being offered.  
 
5. Chandigarh University: The advertisement’s claims, “CU sees a surge of 60% in number of companies”, “457 companies visited”, “4964 placement offers”, and “Top MNC’S offering premium packages!”, were not substantiated with verifiable supporting data, and are misleading by exaggeration. Also the claim, “Adjudged as University with best placements”, was not substantiated with verifiable comparative data.  The claim is not qualified to mention the source and date of research and is misleading by omission. The claim, “26.97 highest package offered”, was not substantiated with evidence to prove that students were offered the claimed salary package, and is misleading by exaggeration. Further the claim, “Companies that visit only CU amongst the private institutions of North India”, was not substantiated with any verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s institute and other similar institutes, or through a market survey data, and is misleading by implication and exaggeration and also the claim, “Scholarships upto 100%”, was not substantiated with supporting evidence of 100% scholarships availed by any of their students, and was misleading by implication and ambiguity regarding the amount of scholarship and the total number of scholarships being offered.
 
6. Thiagarajar College of Engineering: The advertisement’s claims, “60 years of Academic Excellence”, “Academic Process: Industry co-created curriculum (TVS Motors) for Mechanical and Electrical & Electronics Engineering. Industry supported Labs- Intel, IBM, Motorola, Agilent, NI, TI, Microsoft, Freescale, ARM, BOSCH, Siemens…”, “Three U.S. patent and one India Patent”, “163 of 276 of the faculty possess Ph.D.”, “One/Two credit courses by industries”, “Thiagarajar Telecom Solutions Pvt Ltd” an incubated company in TCE”, and “Innovation and Entrepreneurship Promotion Hub-EDII, Govt. of Tamil Nadu”, were not substantiated with supporting data, and are misleading by exaggeration. Further the claims, “NIRF Ranking Among IIT’s NIT’s, Universities and Engineering Colleges”, “37th Ranking in India”, “NIRF Ranking Among Engineering Colleges- 4th in India, 3rd in Tamil Nadu, 1st in India for Research, 4th in India for Teaching and Learning”, were not substantiated with ranking data as claimed in the advertisement.  The claims are not qualified to mention the source and date of research and are misleading by omission.   
 
7. Efficient Brainy: The advertisement’s claims, “Whole brain training and super sensory development program”, “Whole brain development program”, “DMRIT Smart Kit”, “DMIT (dermatoglyphics multiple intelligence test)”, “Develop concentration”, “Boost up memory”, “Increase creativity” and “Smart kid kit- Helps your child to be better than the best” were inadequately substantiated and are misleading by exaggeration.  The claims, “Use both sides of your brain (left and right brain) in tandem and become a super genius”, “Affiliation to International brain research organisation and Society for neurosciences”,  and claim (in Kannada) as translated in English, “Puttur's efficient brainy children are we, who can do anything with our eyes blindfolded”, were not substantiated, and are misleading by exaggeration. Also the visuals showing children blindfolded and claiming “I can still read”, “I can still write”,  “I can still play”, “ I can still walk”, are misleading by gross exaggeration, and exploits the consumers’ lack of knowledge and is likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers. 
 
FOOD AND BEVERAGES:
1. Synthite Industries Ltd. (Kitchen Treasures Brahmin Sambar Powder): The advertisement’s claim, “World's largest chilli company”, was not substantiated with market survey data/sales data, or any verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s product and other competitors in the same category, or through a third party validation. Also the claim, “Awarded outstanding exporter of the year for the last 36 years by the Spices Board of India”, was not substantiated with verifiable supporting data and with copies of the award certificates for the claim made.
 
2. Laxmi Protein Products Pvt. Ltd. (Laxmi Toor Dal): The advertisement’s claim, “Gujarat’s No.1 Desi Toor Dal”, was not substantiated with any market survey data or verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s products and other competitive products, or any third party validation to prove these claims. The claim is misleading by exaggeration.
 
3. Godfrey Phillips India Ltd. (Pan Vilas Pan Masala): The advertisement’s claims, “India’s No.1 Brand”, “Awarded by World Consulting Research Corporation”, “Chosen as Asia’s most promising brand 2015-16 for Pan Masala”, “India’s most promising Brand 2016 in Pan Masala category - Awarded by World Consulting and Research Corporation.- Awarded by India’s most Trusted Brand Council. – Awarded by International Brand Consulting Corporation” and “Power Brand India Industry Trendsetter Award 2016 in Pan Masala Category.- Awarded by Planman Media”, were not adequately substantiated and are misleading by exaggeration.  
 
OTHERS:-
1. Hindustan Petroleum Corp (HP Petroleum):  The visual of “a rider and pillion rider on a two wheeler without helmet” as depicted in the advertisement shows violation of traffic rules and is an unsafe practice.
 
2. M/s. Lamode Fashions Pvt Ltd (LaMode): The visual shown in the advertisement of “a rider and a pillion rider on a two wheeler without helmets”, shows violation of traffic rules and is an unsafe practice. Also, the pillion rider showed standing while the vehicle is in motion shows a dangerous practice, manifests a disregard for safety and encourages negligence.
 
3. Uber India: The advertisement’s claims, “Save Rs 500 on your next 10 Uber rides” and “Ride Uber and the discount will auto apply”, were misleading by omission of validity of the promotion period, and that the offer is subject to terms and conditions.
 
4. MRF Ltd. (Wood Coat): The advertisement’s claims (in Gujarati) as appearing in the English version of the advertisement, “Wood Coat, the most trusted premium wood finish for more than twenty years” and “It is a 100% polyurethane wood finish that helps protect wooden furniture for years”, were not substantiated with product composition details confirming that it is 100% PU or other supporting data.  The claims are misleading by exaggeration.
 
5. Indian Oil Corp Ltd (Servo Oil): The advertisement’s claim, “India’s largest selling trusted lubricants”, was not substantiated with verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s product and other competitive products, or with a market sales data, or through a third party validation.  Also the claim, “Selected super brand India 2014-2015”, was not substantiated with supporting data, and was misleading by ambiguity and exaggeration as the advertiser has used 2014-2015 survey data for an advertisement published in 2017.  
 
6. Ultra-Card Print World Pvt. Ltd. (Print World): The advertisement’s claim, “For the first time in Gujarat, School-College- I Card made by French technology”, was not substantiated with supporting data and is misleading by implication and exaggeration.  
 
7. The Coca-Cola India Pvt. Ltd.: The advertisement’s claims, “131 years younger”, “Did you know? Coca-Cola is the 2nd most recognized word across the world the first being OK”, “1.9 billion servings of The Coca-Cola Company products are sold each day. During the first year that Coca- Cola was introduced, back in 1886, sales averaged a modest nine drinks per day”, “Coca-Cola is the longest serving partner of the Olympic Games since 1928”, and “Coca-Cola’s partners have revitalized over 6000 schools across India with better amenities as part of Support My School Campaign”, were not substantiated with supporting data, and are misleading by exaggeration.  
 
8. Usha International Ltd. (Usha Honeywell Evaporative Air Cooler):  The advertisement’s claim, “Cools up to 80 square metres”, was inadequately substantiated under test conditions and is misleading by exaggeration.
 
9. Gujarat News Broadcasters Pvt. Ltd. (VTV News): The advertisement’s claim, “Gujarat’s most popular channel”, was not substantiated with viewership data of the advertiser’s channel against all other competitive channels, and is misleading by exaggeration and implication.  
 
10. Sangeetha Mobiles Pvt Ltd: The advertisement does not call out that the amount stated of Rs 4333 is the EMI amount per month. The FAQ section of the website anticipates such confusion however; this is not addressed upfront in the advertisement. The “*” corresponds to “conditions apply” but does not direct consumer to the website for details. Hence the advertisement’s claim, “Rs.4,333* (*conditions apply)”, was misleading by ambiguity and omission.
 
11. D'DÉCOR (D clean): The advertisement’s claims, “India’s first spill and stain proof patented technology. An innovation so superior, that it keeps upholstery spotless and perfect for years” were inadequately substantiated. The claims are misleading by exaggeration.   
 
12. Epson India Pvt. Ltd. (Epson Printers): Though the advertisement’s claims are qualified with disclaimers, the disclaimers in the advertisement were not legible, and the hold duration of the disclaimers was not in compliance with the ASCI Guidelines for Disclaimers.   
 
13. TCL India: The advertisement’s claim, “India’s fastest growing TV brand” was inadequately substantiated and is misleading by exaggeration.  
 
14. Ibibo Group Pvt. Ltd. (Fab Hotels): The Ibibo website showing images of the hotel having gym bar, snooker pool, dining area restaurant 24x7, dining service and tea coffee maker in room, are false, misleading and are misrepresentation of facts by giving false information about the facilities being provided at the hotel.  
 
15. Nakshatra World Limited (Nakshatra.world): The advertisement’s claim, “India’s Most Trusted Jewellery Company”, awarded by International Brand Consulting Corporation, USA, was not substantiated with supporting data.  The claim is misleading by exaggeration.
 
16. Madura Fashion & Lifestyle (Linen Club): The advertisement visual showing Actor Farhan Akhtar pillion riding wearing a helmet without strap, and both rider and pillion rider wearing non-ISI standard helmets, is in violation of Section 129 (a) and (b) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The visual depiction in the advertisement without justifiable reason, shows a dangerous practice and manifests a disregard for safety.  
 
17. SBI Funds Management Pvt. Ltd. (SBI Mutual Fund): The advertisement’s claim, (in Gujarati) as translated into English, “SBI Mutual Fund (dual advantage fund closing on 24-7-2017)” and “SBI Mutual Fund (dual advantage fund closing on 25-9-2017)” were misleading by omission of disclaimer to mention the standard warning as per the 6th Schedule of SEBI (MF) (Amendment 2012 w.e.f. 21-2-2012) Regulation, 1996. 
 
18. Heinz India P.  Limited: The advertisement makes the claim, "Naye best ever Complan ke ek cup me hain India ke do leading health drinks se bhi zyada growth protein".  The said claim is accompanied by the visual of: Complan = Brand X + Brand Y. The claim “new” was false and misleading as the product being advertised was launched in year 2003-04 and was marketed till year 2012. A different formula lower in protein and fat content was launched and marketed during 2012 till date. Further, while the claim, “Best ever Complan” was not considered to be objectionable, it was considered that the claim, “Best ever formula Complan” to be misleading by implication that it is best as compared to other product formulae in the market (referred as X and Y). Calling protein as “growth protein” while making comparison with product X and Y was considered to be misleading by implication when seen in conjunction with the 2X growth claim. It was noted that the study being quoted by the advertiser is acceptable for the claim of “2X height increase” growth for the population being referred to in the disclaimer “Other kids who consume usual diet alone Vs Complan kids who consume usual diet plus Complan”. However the quoted study becomes irrelevant with respect to comparison with products X and Y and is misleading by ambiguity and implication, particularly so since the claim of 2X growth also appears in pack visuals in TVC. Furthermore, the increase being depicted in the pack visuals is an absolute height of 2X whereas the clinical study is about 2X increase (incremental growth). This is misleading by exaggeration. Also, the depiction of this comparison on back of pack to be misleading by ambiguity and omission of the reference that “Other kids” being referred are kids who consume usual diet alone (and not users of product X and Y). The disclaimer is not on the same panel of the packaging as the claim made. Hence the advertisement contravened the ASCI Code as well as ASCI Guidelines on “New” claim and Guidelines on Disclaimers. 
 
19. Friend’s Electronics: The advertisement’s claim, "There is no service support on Online Shopping" is misrepresentation of facts, and was misleading by exaggeration, and by implication unfairly denigrated other online e-retailers in the same category.   
 
SUO MOTO ACTION
The advertisements given below were picked up through ASCI’s Suo Moto surveillance of print and TV media via the National Advertisement Monitoring Services (NAMS) project. Out of 219 advertisements, total of 148 advertisements were considered to be misleading. Of these 69 advertisements were concerned Healthcare, 68 belonged to the Education category, five belonged to the Food & Beverages category, one belonged to Personal Care category and five belonged to ‘others’.
 
HEALTHCARE:-
The CCC found the following claims of 69 advertisements in health care products or services to be either misleading or false or not adequately / scientifically substantiated and hence violating ASCI’s Code. Some of the health care products or services advertisements also contravened provisions of the Drugs & Magic Remedies Act (DMR Act), Drugs and Cosmetics Rules (D&C Rules) and Chapter I.1 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. Complaints against the following advertisements were UPHELD.
 
1. Perfect Point: The advertisement’s claim, “Lose up to seven centimetres in one session”, was not substantiated with supporting clinical evidence, and with treatment efficacy data, and is misleading by exaggeration. Also, the visual in the advertisement implies that a significant weight loss around tummy would be feasible, which is also grossly misleading.
 
2. Evaa Fertility and Gynaecology Centre: The advertisement’s claim, “High Success Rate”, was not substantiated with supporting verifiable data, and is misleading by ambiguity.  
 
3. Bajoria Appliances Pvt. Ltd. (Kutchina Water Purifier): The advertisement’s claims, “Boosts immunity”, “Advanced AO Anti-Oxidant technology that ensures anti-oxidant rich water”, and “Kutchina purifiers guarantee 100% healthy water”, were not substantiated with supporting clinical / technical tests/trial reports, and are misleading by exaggeration.
 
4. Smart GYM: The advertisement’s claim, “Get flat belly in six weeks”, was not substantiated with supporting data. Also the claim, “The best weight loss course in India”, was not substantiated with any verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s institute and other similar institutes in the same category, or with any market survey data to prove this claim. The claims are misleading by exaggeration.
 
5. Oma Health and Beauty Clinic: The advertisement’s claims, “Reduce 40-60 centimetres in just five days”, and “Guaranteed weight loss upto five kilograms”, were not substantiated with supporting clinical evidence, and with treatment efficacy data, and are misleading by exaggeration.  Also, efficacy being depicted via images of before and after the treatment are misleading.
 
6. A. M. Reddy Homeopathy: The advertisement’s claim, “Migraine, one side pain, severe pain, vomits, these can be cured 100 percent”, was not substantiated with supporting clinical evidence, and is misleading by gross exaggeration. 
 
7. Positive Homeopathy: The advertisement’s claim, “Migraine, headache, rigorous pain, vomiting everything will be cured 100 percent”, was not substantiated with supporting clinical evidence, and is misleading by gross exaggeration.  
 
8. Elements Health Care Solutions (Migrocure Ayurvedic Oil): The advertisement’s claim, “No matter how old is the migraine, it will cure it”, was inadequately substantiated and the claim as well as the product name `Migrocure’ is misleading by exaggeration.  
 
9. Sun India Pharmacy Pvt. Ltd. (Swasthya Vardhak Capsules): The advertisement’s claim, “India’s No.1”, was not substantiated with any market survey data or with any verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s product and other similar products in the same category or through a third party validation.  The claim was misleading by exaggeration.
 
10. Naturoveda Health World: The advertisement’s claims, “Honoured as the safest healthcare destination for treating lakhs of patients successfully”, and “India's most trusted and reliable healthcare destination in the field of natural medical sciences", were inadequately substantiated with supporting data.  The claims are misleading by exaggeration. Also the claim, “Awarded as "Maharshicharak, hakim Jalinos and Maharshi patanjali samman for combining natural medical system in the most scientific manner", was not considered to be objectionable. However, the advertiser did not mention the source of this data / awarding organization.
 
11. Jolly Health Care (Jolly Tulsi 51 Drops): The advertisement’s claim, “Just five drops in a day, keep diseases and doctors away”, “Jolly Tulsi - 51 Drops enhances your immune system”,  and “Save entire family from every weather, every disease”, were not substantiated with evidence of product efficacy, and are misleading by exaggeration.
 
12. Caram Healthcare India Pvt. Ltd. (Diamedica): The advertisement’s claim, “Nation's Most Secured, Most Effective & Most Economical Tablets”, was not substantiated with any supporting comparative or market survey data. Also the claims, “Shows full results in 90 days”, “Prevent the side effects of diabetes naturally”, “Sensation of increasing insulin”, “Protection for liver and pancreas”, “Protection for kidney problems”,  “Protection for eye problems”, “Heart rejuvenation” and “Resistance from insulin”, were not substantiated with clinical evidence of product efficacy.  The claims are misleading by exaggeration.
 
13. Ayurdham Kerala Ayurvedic Panchkarma: The advertisement’s claims, “Get Cured by Ayurdham Kerala Ayurvedic Panchkarma”, and “Special treatments - Paralysis, Migraine, and Psoriasis”, were not substantiated with supporting clinical evidence. The claims are misleading by exaggeration and implication that the advertised conditions would get cured by the treatment.
 
14. Olivet Pharma Pvt. Ltd. (Ayusya Super speciality Treatment Centre): The advertisement’s claim, “To lead a healthy, ailment-free life”, was not substantiated with supporting evidence and is misleading by exaggeration.
 
15. Arogyam Ayurvedic Hospital: The advertisement’s claims, “Avoid knee replacement, treatment is possible through Ayurveda”, and “Lakhs of people have got riddance from diseases”, were not substantiated with supporting clinical evidence and are misleading by exaggeration.
 
16. Nurture Health Care (Bgainer Capsule): The advertisement’s claims, “Increase weight upto 12 kilograms in just three months”, and “Best Ayurvedic formula without any side effects”, were not substantiated with clinical evidence of product efficacy, and are misleading by exaggeration.
 
17. Blizz Biosculpting: The advertisement’s claim, “Lose upto seven kilograms” was not substantiated with supporting clinical evidence, and with treatment efficacy data, and is misleading by exaggeration.
 
18. SKS Ayurveda Impex Pvt. Ltd. (SKS Height Plus): The advertisement’s claim, “Increase Height with Ayurveda,” was considered to be, prima facie, in violation of the DMR Act.
 
19. Shree Ujjawal Ayurveda (Shree Ujjawal Ayurveda Products): The advertisement’s claims, “Increase Sex Time Upto 25-30 Minutes without Interruption,” and “Increase Length and Thickness of Organ, Sperm Related Problems, Premature Ejaculation, Nightfall, Organ Laxity, Childhood Mistakes”, and the visual in the advertisement read in conjunction with the claims objected to implies that the products are meant for the enhancement of sexual pleasure, were considered to be, prima facie, in violation of the DMR Act.
 
20. Rogmukti Ayurvedic Clinic: The advertisement’s claim, “100% Guaranteed Ayurvedic Treatment for sex weakness, quick discharge, night fall, infections, less sperm counting, and short bend loose penis”, and  was considered to be, prima facie, in violation of the DMR Act.
 
21. Ratan Ayurvedic Sansthan Pvt. Ltd. (Su dol Body Toner Capsules): The advertisement’s claims, “I have found so much happiness that I am unable to keep it in my body”, “If you are broad minded Sudol will help increase your self-confidence”, “Enhances the beauty of women” and the visual in the advertisement read in conjunction with the claims objected to implies that the products are meant for the enhancement of sexual pleasure, were considered to be, prima facie, in violation of the DMR Act.
 
22. Positive Homeopathy (Positive Slimming): The advertisement’s claim, “Celebrate the freedom from obesity through positive slimming,” was considered to be, prima facie, in violation of the DMR Act.
 
23. Nisargalaya Drugs Pvt. Ltd. (Phyto X-Tra Power): The advertisement’s claims “Increase the quantity and quality of the semen”, “Increases vitality”, “Cures nerves weakness and the sex organs”, “Effective on premature ejaculation and on nocturnal emission” and “Rejuvenated female organs and helps in maintaining a perfect hormone balance,” along with and the visual in the advertisement read in conjunction with the claims objected to imply that the products are meant for the enhancement of sexual pleasure, were considered to be, prima facie, in violation of the DMR Act.
 
24. Nirog Ayurvedic Center: The advertisement’s claim, “Get rid of wart haemorrhoids, fistula within 15 days with AFRT medicine made from new Ayurvedic rare herbs,” was considered to be, prima facie, in violation of the D&C Rules.
 
25. Manishree Homeopathic Clinic: The advertisement’s claims, “Magic action within 15 Days” and “High blood pressure quick and permanent cure within short period,” were considered to be, prima facie, in violation of the DMR Act.
 
26. Hamdard Laboratories India (Hamdard Wellness): The advertisement’s claim, “For natural cure visit Hamdard Center for the following and various problems - Diabetes and Heart Diseases” was considered to be, prima facie, in violation of the DMR Act.
 
27. Dr. Dassan’s Life Care Ayurvedic Herbal Treatment and Research Centre: The advertisement’s claims, “Paralysis patients get saved from getting handicap” and “After a seizure his legs, forearm, hands and tongue were not working but through Dr.Dassans treatment for 15 days, he is completely cured” were considered to be, prima facie, in violation of the DMR Act.
 
28. B C German Homeo Clinic: The advertisement’s claim, “Successfully treated diseases like epilepsy, leukoderma (White Spot), arthritis, etc. incurable diseases,” was considered to be, prima facie, in violation of the DMR Act.
 
29. Dr. H.L. Parmar Ayurved & Panchkarm Hospital: The advertisement’s claim, “Provides successful treatment through Panchakarma and Ayurveda method to diseases like stone diseases, and diabetes” was considered to be, prima facie, in violation of the DMR Act.
 
30. Prince Pharma (2 Much Gold Capsules): The advertisement’s claims, “My husband’s love has never faded, you know why? Because he has 2 Much Gold Capsules that keep the feeling of love intact and does not allow it to reduce”, “Problems like weakness due to increasing age” and “For stamina” were considered to be, prima facie, in violation of the DMR Act.
 
31. SDI Herbo Chem Pvt. Ltd. - Zosh Ayurvedic Oil and Capsules: The advertisement’s claims, “Ayurvedic oil and capsule for men” and “Power and stamina for men”, along with the visual in the advertisement read in conjunction with the claims objected to imply that the products are meant for the enhancement of sexual pleasure, were considered to be, prima facie, in violation of the DMR Act.
 
32. Dindayal Aushadhi Pvt. Ltd. (303 Gold Power Oil): The advertisement’s claim, “For men only” and the visual in the advertisement read in conjunction with the claims objected to imply that the products are meant for the enhancement of sexual pleasure, were considered to be, prima facie, in violation of the DMR Act. 
 
33. Sun Laboratories (P) Ltd. (Titanic-K2 Plus Capsule): The advertisement’s claims, “Now twice the strength”, “Power capsule for men” and “The first choice of men which gives the pleasure of masculinity for longer duration without any side effects” along with the visual in the advertisement read in conjunction with the claims objected to imply that the products are meant for the enhancement of sexual pleasure, were considered to be, prima facie, in violation of the DMR Act. 
 
34. Gaharwar Pharma Products Pvt. Ltd. (P.V Tone Oil and Capsule): The advertisement’s claims, “Wonderful formula to increase excitement and strength”, “And helps to promote desire” and the advertisement shows visuals of lovebirds implying product meant to enhance sexual pleasure were considered to be, prima facie, in violation of the DMR Act.
 
35. Men’s Health Clinic: The advertisement’s claims, “A trusted place for solution of sexual problems of men - Premature Ejaculation & Impotency” and “Discharge of sperm, semen thinness, weakness due to diabetes, low libido” along with the visual in the advertisement read in conjunction with the claims objected to imply that the products are meant for the enhancement of sexual pleasure, were considered to be, prima facie, in violation of the DMR Act.
 
36. Homeocare International Pvt. Ltd.: The advertisement’s claim, “By genetic constitutional method rectifying the defects caused by infertility which is raised in men and women. Not only giving permanent solution but also laying the path for having second or third child,” was considered to be, prima facie, in violation of the DMR Act.
 
37. Dr. Atul Mishra German Homoeopathic Agency & Clinic: The advertisement’s claim, “Helps to cure diseases such as venereal diseases, premature ejaculation and spermatorrhea from the roots, etc.” was considered to be, prima facie, in violation of the DMR Act.
 
38. Diacure Herbal Powder: The advertisement’s claim, “Kidney stone syrup will remove the stone in kidney, 100% cure in 12 hours,” was considered to be, prima facie, in violation of the DMR Act.
 
39. Soliel International Healthcare Products (BT-36 Body toner capsule and cream): The advertisement’s claim, “For good results, for 60 days daily take 3 capsules and massage with cream twice a day” and the visual in the advertisement read in conjunction with the claims objected to imply that the products are meant for breast enhancement, were considered to be, prima facie, in violation of the DMR Act.
 
40. Gaharwar Pharma Products Pvt. Ltd. (Gaharwar OTC Products): The advertisement’s claims, “Gain power”, “Improve your libido by using it” and the visual in the advertisement read in conjunction with the claims objected to imply that the products is meant for sexual enhancement, were considered to be, prima facie, in violation of the DMR Act.
 
41. Rajnish Hot Deals Pvt. Ltd. (PlayWin Plus Capsule): The advertisement’s claims, “Increase vigour, strength, energy and pep”, “Helpful in preventing premature ejaculation” and “For powerful stamina” along with the visual in the advertisement read in conjunction with the claims objected to imply that the product is meant for sexual enhancement, were considered to be, prima facie, in violation of the DMR Act.
 
42. Rajnish Hot Deals Pvt. Ltd. (PlayWin Plus Capsule): The advertisement’s claims, “Increase vigour, strength, energy and pep”, “Helpful in preventing premature ejaculation” and “For powerful stamina”, along with the visual in the advertisement read in conjunction with the claims objected to imply that the product is meant for sexual enhancement, were considered to be, prima facie, in violation of the DMR Act.
 
43. Rajnish Hot Deals Pvt. Ltd. (PlayWin Plus Capsule): The advertisement’s claims, “Increase vigour, strength, energy and pep” and “For powerful stamina” along with the visual in the advertisement read in conjunction with the claims objected to imply that the product is meant for sexual enhancement, were considered to be, prima facie, in violation of the DMR Act.
 
44. Shree Maruti Herbal (Stay-On Power Capsule): The advertisement’s claims, “Helps keep the power and pep in body intact and makes body strong”, “For excitement, vigour and strength” and the visual in the advertisement read in conjunction with the claims objected to imply that the product is meant for enhancement of sexual pleasure. Also the advertisement provides link to website which refers to StayOn Capsules are a miracle of Ayurveda, and while these are very effective for ensuring sexual wellbeing and letting you get over sexual dysfunctions. These were considered to be, prima facie, in violation of the DMR Act.
 
45. Shree Maruti Herbal (Stay-On Power Capsule): The advertisement’s claims, “The magic of intimacy remains constant”, “You will get a feeling of youthfulness, immunity power, pep, excitement, strength and vigour physically and mentally” and the visual in the advertisement and product packaging read in conjunction with the claims objected to imply that the product is meant for the enhancement of sexual pleasure. Also the advertisement provides link to website which refers to Stay-On Capsules are a miracle of Ayurveda, and while these are very effective for ensuring sexual wellbeing and letting you get over sexual dysfunctions. These were considered to be, prima facie, in violation of the DMR Act.
 
46. Shree Maruti Herbal (Stay-On Power Capsule): The advertisement’s claim, “Use of Stay-On will give you a feeling of youthfulness, immunity, power, pep, excitement, strength and vigour both physically and mentally” and the tagline translated as, “My Heart goes crazy for you” along with the visual in the advertisement and product packaging read in conjunction with the claims objected to imply that the product is meant for the enhancement of sexual pleasure. The advertisement provides a link to the website which refers to Stay-On Capsules as a miracle of Ayurveda, and while these are very effective for ensuring sexual wellbeing and letting you get over sexual dysfunctions. This was considered to be, prima facie, in violation of the DMR Act.
 
47. Shree Maruti Herbal (Stay-On Power Capsule): The advertisement’s claims, “Your partner’s love will get stronger” and “Use of Stay-On will give you a feeling of youthfulness, immunity, power, pep, excitement, strength and vigour physically and mentally” along with the visual in the advertisement and product packaging read in conjunction with the claims objected to imply that the product is meant for the enhancement of sexual pleasure. The advertisement provides a link to the website which refers to Stay-On Capsules are a miracle of Ayurveda, and while these are very effective for ensuring sexual wellbeing and letting you get over sexual dysfunctions. This was considered to be, prima facie, in violation of the DMR Act.
 
48. Rajnish Hot Deals Pvt. Ltd. - Kasaav Powder: The advertisement’s claims, “Provides youthfulness to women at every moment of life”, “Remove problems in women like white discharge, itching, odour and infection” and “Generates awareness of new enthusiasm and confidence and youthfulness in just 15 days” were considered to be, prima facie, in violation of the DMR Act.
 
49. Gaudium IVF and Gynae Solutions: The advertisement’s claim, “The wait for your own child is now over…Come to Gaudium IVF – Transforming hopes into realities,” was considered to be, prima facie, in violation of the DMR Act.
 
50.  Stammering Relief Centre: The advertisement’s claim, “Cure stammering and stuttering in just two weeks - 100% guarantee” was considered to be, prima facie, in violation of the D&C Rules.
 
51. Holistic Treatment Centre: The advertisement’s claim, “Get freedom from stammering and speak fluently like others” was considered to be, prima facie, in violation of the D&C Rules.
 
52. V-Care Skin Clinic & Piles Centre: The advertisement’s claim, “Get full freedom from piles, fissures and fistula diseases” was considered to be, prima facie, in violation of the D&C Rules.
 
53. Sarvoday Skin and Hair Clinic: The advertisement’s claim, “Successful treatment of diseases like white spots” was considered to be, prima facie, in violation of the D&C Rules and the DMR Act.
 
54. OPTM HealthCare Private Limited: The advertisement’s claims, “Regain your cartilage health and skeleton muscles strength along with flexion without any pain killers, injection and surgical procedures. OPTM scientifically diagnoses the root cause of the problem and treats the cause at cellular and molecular levels”, “Get back healthy knees without operation, knee caps and pain killers”, and “Hi stronger knees and say bye surgery”, were not substantiated with scientific rationale or supporting clinical evidence and are misleading by exaggeration. Also the claim, “Honoured with the most prestigious 'Rose of Paracelsus award”, was not substantiated with copy of the award certificate, details, references of the awards received such as the year, source and category. Hence, the claim is misleading by omission of disclaimer to qualify this claim. Further the claims, “Certified OPTM for 'Best medical practice' in the field of pain treatment” and “Awarded by AYUSH minister for outstanding research done on pain & phytomedicine for the last 30 years”, were not substantiated by any reliable data, and the advertisement was misleading by ambiguity and implication. 
 
55. OPTM HealthCare Private Limited: The advertisement’s claim, “Get strong knee without surgery”, was not substantiated with supporting clinical evidence and is misleading by exaggeration. Also the claim, “Awarded by Ayush ministry”, was not substantiated by any reliable data, and the advertisement was misleading by ambiguity and implication.
 
56. Lida Biotech Pvt. Ltd.: The advertisement’s claim, “One pill per day will help reduce weight without diet or exercise”, was not substantiated with product composition details, scientific rationale or product efficacy data and is misleading by exaggeration.  Also, efficacy being depicted via visuals of before and after the treatment are misleading by gross exaggeration.  
 
57. Dr. Gill Future Health Centre: The advertisement’s claim, “There is no need of knee replacement, knee is cured through medicines”, was not substantiated with supporting clinical evidence. Also the testimonial claim is misleading by exaggeration and not representative of results that are achievable in reality.  
 
58. Slim & Smile Slimming Centre : The advertisement’s  claims, “To reduce weight without exercise, medicine, fatigue, pain and no side effect”,  “To reduce six to 12 kilograms through modern machine and reduce three to six inches figure”, and “To give 100% Guarantee”, were not substantiated with supporting clinical evidence, and with treatment efficacy data  and are misleading by exaggeration. The visuals in the advertisement imply a significant weight loss around tummy would be feasible, which is also grossly misleading.
 
59. V3 Slim Care:  The advertisement’s claims, “Reduce ten kilograms within two months”, and “No side effects, no medicine, no crash diet and no exercise”, were not substantiated with supporting clinical evidence, and with treatment efficacy data, and are misleading by exaggeration.  Also, efficacy being depicted via images of before and after the treatment is misleading.
 
60. Vasan Healthcare Private Limited - Vasan Eye Care Hospital: The advertisement’s claim, “India’s largest eye care provider”, was not substantiated with any market survey data, or with verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s hospital and other Eye Care hospitals, or through a third party validation.  The claim is misleading by exaggeration.
 
61. Dr. Bora Super Speciality Homeopathy: The advertisement’s claim in Marathi, as translated into English, “Get freedom from Thyroid”, was not substantiated with supporting clinical evidence and is misleading by exaggeration.
 
62. Amrutham Ayurveda Bazaar and Hospital: The advertisement’s claims, “Get disease less health”, “Joint Pains, Worn bones can be completely cured”, “Reduction of sinusitis/allergic arthritis completely”, “Migraine can be completely prevented”, and “Psoriasis prevention is possible only with ayurveda”, were not substantiated with supporting clinical evidence and are misleading by exaggeration.
 
63. Nurture Health Care (Medora UpcharPaddhati): The advertisement’s claim, “Reduces 13 kilograms in just few months”, was not substantiated with clinical evidence of product efficacy. Also, the testimonial in the advertorial appears to be misleading by gross exaggeration.
 
64. Khodiyar Ayurvedic: The advertisement’s claims, “Get permanent riddance from cholesterol” and “Protect yourself from heart attack” were not substantiated with supporting clinical evidence and are misleading by exaggeration.
 
65. Dindayal Industries Limited (303 Capsules): The advertisement’s claim, “Due to busy life, men are unable to manage their health well, due to low energy, they are unable to satisfy their partner’s expectations”, “303 gold powers oil helps remove weakness”, was not substantiated with product efficacy data and is misleading by exaggeration. These claims imply that the product is meant for enhancement of sexual pleasure, which is in breach of the law as it violated the DMR Act. 
 
66. Mdj Nutriments Pvt. Ltd. (Cassia Herbal Koffi): The advertisement’s claim, “100% organic”, was not substantiated with supporting data, and is misleading. Also the claims which state, “Cassia has benefits like anti-diabetic, improves blur vision, control's the blood pressure, cures kidney and intestine problems, nerve tonic, weight loss, cures dandruff and fever, maintain cholesterol level, liver stimulant, blood purifier, helpful during constipation, cough, bronchitis, cardiac disorder and leprosy”, were not substantiated with supporting clinical evidence of product efficacy and are misleading by exaggeration.
 
67. Nuayurveda Clinic: The advertisement’s claims, “Live a long and disease free life with panchakarma treatments”, “Panchakarma along with powerful ancient Ayurvedic medicines and proper diet balances the Tridoshas. This leads to complete physical , mental and emotional health by treating the root of the disease and not just the symptoms”, and “Five conditions that Nuayurveda can manage joint pain, frozen shoulder, arthritis, spondylitis, depression & anxiety, obesity and weight loss, detoxification & rejuvenation, psoriasis and eczema”, were not substantiated with scientific rationale or supporting clinical evidence, and are misleading.   
 
68. Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. (Suncros Soft): The claim on the packaging of Suncros Soft, the words "chemical agent free" are prominently shown on the front of pack but disclaimer "Free from chemical sunscreen agents" are printed on side panel of pack in very small fonts, which can hardly be noticed. In this connection it is necessary to refer to Clause 4 (III) of ASCI Guidelines for Disclaimers made in supporting, limiting or explaining claims made in advertisements which reads as under "Placement position of disclaimers of a claim on packaging should be in a prominent and visible space and could be ideally on the same panel of the packaging as the claim made." Further the advertisement’s claim, "No. 1 choice of dermatologists" for Suncros Soft, was not substantiated and misleading by ambiguity and implication. 
 
69. New Touch Skin Care New (Touch Laser Centre): The advertisement’s claim, “FDA approved”, was not substantiated with supporting evidence and is misleading by ambiguity and exaggeration.  
 
PERSONAL CARE:-
1. Amrit 55 – Herbal Lip Therapy for Pink Lips: The advertisement’s claims, “Only within seven days, guarantee to make black lips pink like before” and “100% guaranteed solution”, were not substantiated with product efficacy data. Also the claim, “First time in India”, was not substantiated with any comparative data of the advertiser’s product and other competitive products in the same category.  The claims are misleading by exaggeration. 
 
EDUCATION:-
The CCC found following claims in the advertisements by 68 different advertisers were not substantiated and, thus, violated ASCI Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions. Hence complaints against these advertisements were UPHELD.
 
1. ALS Satellite Education Private Limited: The advertisement’s claim, “India's Largest IAS Coaching Network”, was not substantiated with any market survey data or with any verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s institute and other similar institutes, or through a third party validation.  The claim was misleading by exaggeration.
 
2. Saraswati Educational & Cultural Society - IPSR Group or Institutions: The advertisement’s claim, “1st ranked institute for pharmacy & management”, was not substantiated with any supporting verifiable data for the ranking as claimed in the advertisement and the methodology for the ranking.  The claim is misleading by exaggeration and omission of the reference to the source of this data. The claim, “100% Placement”, was not substantiated with authentic supporting data such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students, nor any independent audit or verification certificate. Hence, the claim is misleading by exaggeration. Also the claim, “Scholarship and fee reimbursement for all students”, was not substantiated with supporting evidence of scholarships availed and fee reimbursement given to any of their students.  The claim is false and misleading by ambiguity regarding the amount of scholarship and the total number of scholarships being offered.
 
3. Lakshmikanthammal Educational Trust (R.M.K. College Engineering of Technology): The advertisement’s claims, “Bharatiyavidyabhavan sponsored national award for the best engineering college for overall best performance 2015”, “Dr. Kalam best faculty award, best project award and young scientist awards”, and “Ranked No.1 among the top 20 engineering colleges in India with excellent industry exposure by higher education review magazine, 2017”, were inadequately substantiated. The claims are misleading by ambiguity and omission of the exact information related to the awards and the date of the award for one claim.    
 
4. Swami Vivekanand Vishwavidyalay (Swami Vivekanand University): The advertisement’s claim, “The most awarded university of MP”, was not substantiated with any verifiable comparative data and is misleading by exaggeration.
 
5. R K Bajaj Group Of Institute (G L Bajaj Institute of Technology and Management): The advertisement’s claim, “No.1 Private Engineering College in UP by NIRF”, was not substantiated with NIRF ranking data as claimed in the advertisement. For the claims of  the advertiser’s institute being the Best Engineering Institute in India (North),  the Best Engineering College in UP, the Best Institute in Placements, 2017 and the Institute with Best Academic & Industry Interface, 2017, the advertiser did not provide copy of the particular awards/certificates as claimed in the advertisement, the details of the process as to how the selection was done i.e. survey methodology, details of  survey data, criteria used for evaluation, questionnaires used, names of other similar colleges that were part of the  survey and the outcome of the survey.  The credibility and authenticity and name of the certifying bodies were not provided by the advertiser.  The claims, “The Best Institute Overall BBC knowledge Education Leadership Award, 2017”, “The Best Engineering Institute in India (North) 2017 by ASSOCHAM”, “The Best Engineering College in UP, India Excellence Awards, 2017”, “The Best Institute in Placements, 2017 Modi Awards” and “Institute with Best Academic & Industry Interface, 2017 MODI Awards”, were not substantiated with supporting data, and are misleading by exaggeration.  
 
6. Renaissance College of Hotel Management and Catering Technology: In the advertisement’s claim, while the advertiser may be providing placement assistance to their students, the use of 100% numerical is not relevant for “placement assistance” claim.   The use of “100%” as a descriptor in the claim is misleading by implication. The claim,  “The Most Admired Hotel Management College of Uttarakhand Award Winner – 2017”, was not  substantiated with supporting data, and is misleading by exaggeration.
 
7. Defence Services College: The advertisement’s claim, “100% selection or else get fee back”, was not substantiated with supporting data for 100% selection of their students and / or any supporting evidence of the students who were refunded with the fees back if they were not selected for the courses offered.
 
8. Jetking Infotrain Ltd. (Jetking Computer Education): The advertisement’s the claim, “100% Job”, was not substantiated with authentic supporting data such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students, nor any independent audit or verification certificate, and is misleading by exaggeration. The claim, “India's No.1 digital skills institute”, was not substantiated with any verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s institute and other similar institutes, or through a third party validation, and is misleading by exaggeration. Also the claim, “Limca Book of Record Holder for Highest Job Placements”, was not substantiated with copy of the award certificate, details, references of the awards received such as the year, source and category.  Claim is misleading by omission of disclaimer to qualify this claim.
 
9. R.A. Institute: The advertisement’s claim, “Up to 100% scholarship”, was not substantiated with supporting evidence of 100% scholarships availed by any of their students, and was misleading by implication and ambiguity regarding the amount of scholarship and the total number of scholarships being offered.
 
10. Atulesh Convent High School: The advertisement’s claim, “100% scholarship” was not substantiated with supporting evidence of 100% scholarships availed by any of their students and was misleading by ambiguity regarding the amount of scholarship and the total number of scholarships being offered.
 
11. Gujarat University The advertisement’s claim, “100% job ready” and the use of 100% numerical is not relevant for “job ready” claim. The use of “100%” as a descriptor in the claim is misleading by implication.
 
12. Devalya Education Pvt Ltd - Devalya Education: The advertisement’s claim “India’s first digital education platform” was not substantiated with verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s digital platform and other similar digital education platforms and is misleading by exaggeration.
 
Complaints against advertisements of all educational institutes listed below are UPHELD mostly because of unsubstantiated claims that they ‘provide 100% placement/AND/OR because of misleading claim that they provide ‘100% placement assistance/AND/OR they claim to be the No.1 in their respective fields’:
 
Jankalyan Computer Saksharta Mission, LNCT Group of College (Lakshmi Narain College of Technology), LNCT Group Of College (Lakshmi Narain College of Technology), Regional College Of Management, Hindustan Company Construction Pvt Ltd. (Hindustan Aero Academy), National Institute Of Science and Technology, Sojatia Classes, Gautam Buddha Technical Institute, Droan College Of Nursing, Dr Zakir Husain Institute/ Institute Of Hotel Management and Catering Technology & IIBM, Jagan Nath Gupta Memorial Educational Society (JaganNath University), Annai Madha Polytechnic College - AnnaiMadha Catering College, Kanyakumari Community College- (Malankara School of Commerce), Sri Medha Junior College- (Medha Junior College), Sri Mahesh Institute Of Computers, Airline & Hotel Management Academy, Bhagwant University, Christian School Kullu- Christian Nursing Institution, Click Coaching, Dr. Anushka Group of Institutes- Dr. Anushka Vidhi Mahavidyalaya, Emphasis Educational  Charitable Trust- Emphasis Ranchi, Fortune Academy For Career Empowerment- (FACE Institute of Hotel Management), FLYWAY Institution of  and Placements Pvt Ltd (FLYWAY Air Hostess Training Academy), Hanswahini Institute Science & Technology, ITM University, Parul Arogya Seva Mandal Trust- Parul University, Radharaman Group of Institutions, Chiranjeevi Reddy Institute of Engineering and Technology,  Minerva Educational & Charitable Trust -Mangalore Institute of Fire & Safe Engineering, Institute Of Fire Engineering and Safety Management (NIFS), Aryabhatta Group of College (Arybhatta Engineering College), Apparel Training and Design Centre – ATDC, Global Soft, International Academy of Logistics Management, ICA Education Skills Pvt. Ltd, Indian Institute of Business Management, Jaypee Polytechnic and Training Centre - Rewa, Majhighariani Institute of technology & Science, Lindas Institute of Engineering & Vocational Training College, Sherwood Educational Group, Sri Ramswaroop Memorial University, St. Wilfred Education Society, Indian Institute of Safety Management, Academy of Aviation - (Academy of Aviation &Professional Excellence), Dr. Bhimrao Ambedkar Technical Training Institute, JD Institute Technology of Fashion Technology, Maharishi Shiksha Sansthan MSS (Maharishi Institute of Management), Oriental Institute of Science and Technology, Jayalakshmi Technology Institute of Technology, Glam India Academy, Gurukul Management Studies, The ICFAI University, Indra Ganesan Educational and Charitable Trust (Indra Ganesan College of Engineering),  Vikramshila Educational and Welfare Society (International  School of Management - (ISM), DICS Computer Education, Institute Of Science and Management and Techno Herald.
 
FOOD AND BEVERAGES:- 
1. Pure Royale (Pure Royale Supari Mix): The advertisement which is for a Supari product is misleading by omission of a cautionary warning: “Chewing of Supari is injurious to health”.
 
2. Gods Own Food Solutions Pvt. Ltd. (Jackfruit 365): The advertisement’s claim “Reduces stomach and weight” was inadequately substantiated since the benefit is directly attributed to the product but is not substantiated with data (either statistically significant results from a study or publication in peer reviewed scientific journal of repute). In absence of any other information regarding importance of other necessary lifestyle changes, the claim is misleading by omission and exaggeration.
 
3. Kanhai Food Pvt. Ltd. (Kabhi B Bakery Patisserie): The advertisement’s claims, “The Most Awarded” and “Largest Bakery Chain of Gujarat”, were not substantiated with any verifiable comparative data / market survey data of the advertiser’s bakery and other similar bakeries, or any third party validation to prove this claim. The claims are misleading by exaggeration.  
 
4. Ankur Chemfood Pvt. Ltd. (Ankur Salt Range): The advertisement’s claims, “Dr Salt is made especially for High B.P, Diabetes and heart patients”, and “Increase level of haemoglobin in blood and be protected from disease like anaemia by consuming Salt Plus Iron Fortified Salt regularly”, were not substantiated with details of the product composition, evidence of product efficacy via published references or research data, and are misleading by exaggeration.   
 
5. Sethi Enterprises (Family Bread): The advertisement’s claim, “100% wheat flour (zero maida)” was not substantiated with supporting data showing presence of 100% wheat flour and absence of maida, and is misleading.  
 
OTHERS:- 
1. ARG Outlier Media Asianet New Pvt. Ltd. (Republicworld.com): The advertisement’s claim, “India’s biggest digital news network”, was not substantiated with any market survey data or with any verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s institute and other similar institutes or through a third party validation.  The claim was misleading by exaggeration.
 
2. Peram Group: The advertisement’s claims “To be No.1 realtor in Vishakha” and “To be most trusted realtor in South India”, were not substantiated with any market survey data or with any verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s institute and other similar institutes, or through a third party validation.  The claims are misleading by exaggeration.
 
3. Maa Kamakhavya Darbar Fragrances India Pvt. Ltd. (Tiranga Sacred Siddhi Gugal Agarbatti): The advertisement’s claim “India's No.1 Brand”, was not substantiated with any market survey data or with verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s brand and other agarbatti brands or any third party validation to prove this claim. The claim is misleading by exaggeration.
 
4. Garg Industries (Nirol Electricals): The advertisement’s claim “Decrease electricity bill by half” (“bill aada”) was not substantiated with technical data/test reports, and is misleading by exaggeration.
 
5. UtsEco International (Uts Eco Solar Water Heater): The advertisement’s claim, “India’s best solar water heater” was not substantiated with verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s product and other competitor products, or with market survey data, or through a third party validation. The claim was misleading by exaggeration.  
Like this story? Get our top stories by email.

User

Multilevel Marketing: The Day Job That Doesn’t Pay
When then FTC Chairwoman Edith Ramirez took the stage at the Direct Selling Association’s Business & Policy Conference in Washington, D.C. in October 2016, she did not mince words when it came to the widespread use of inappropriate earnings claims as a means of recruitment in the MLM industry.
 
[M]ulti-level marketers should stop presenting business opportunities as a way for individuals to quit their jobs, earn thousands of dollars a month, make career-level income, or get rich because in reality, very few participants are likely to do that. Although it may be true that a very small percentage of participants do have success of this type, testimonials from these rare individuals are likely to be misleading because participants generally do not realize similar incomes.
 
More than a year later, it appears few if any of the DSA members in attendance that day took the warning to heart.
 
A TINA.org investigation found more than 97 percent of DSA member companies are (or have been) engaged in misleading marketing schemes that peddle false and unsubstantiated earnings claims trying to convince prospective distributors to join their MLM network. TINA.org’s probe examined the marketing of every DSA member company as of November 29, 2017 and found that 137 out of 140 misrepresented the amount of money participants are likely to earn — misrepresentations that cause real and substantial harm to consumers.
 
TINA.org’s findings not only constitute violations of FTC law, they also breach the DSA’s own Code of Ethics and in doing so contradict DSA President Joe Mariano’s public statements on the supposed higher standards of the code:
 
DSA enforces one of the most rigorous self-regulatory codes of ethics in business today, ensuring that direct selling companies not only follow the law, but in many cases exceed its requirements.
 
“All too often, consumers with limited capital are induced to part with their money by MLM promises of unlimited wealth that will never come to fruition,” said TINA.org’s Executive Director Bonnie Patten. “It’s time that the DSA and its membership were held accountable for these unsubstantiated income claims.”
 
As a result of these findings, the DSA, the DSA Code of Ethics Administrator, and each MLM company in TINA.org’s database have been notified of the problematic claims.
 
TINA.org investigation
 
Using the November 29, 2017 DSA membership list, TINA.org investigated every company on the roster and found that out of 140 member companies (which includes divisions of certain companies), 137 are making or have made misleading income representations. TINA.org has amassed more than 3,000 examples of companies and/or their distributors making inappropriate earnings claims on their websites and social media platforms. This, despite the fact that Mariano informed TINA.org just last year that:
 
Beginning in 2017, 100 percent of DSA member companies will undergo a mandatory ethics review to ensure compliance with our Code of Ethics, including in the areas of income and product claims.
 
The claims that TINA.org has compiled range from assurances of achieving financial freedom, to making unlimited income, to being able to quit your job and stay home with your children. And these income representations are not hard to find. For the majority of companies, one need look no further than their websites and social media pages. Other assertions of wealth can be found simply by googling the name of an MLM company and “millionaire,” or “financial freedom,” or “free car,” resulting in a plethora of websites and social media posts making false and deceptive claims. Such was the strategy that led to a number of TINA.org’s findings.
 
While most of the MLM databases on TINA.org contain a sampling of around 20 inappropriate income claims, four companies (Kyani, Nerium International, Reliv International, and Team National) have more than 100, Jeunesse Global has more than 80, and 25 companies have less than 10 (Aerus, Become International, Boisset Collection, Carico International, Compelling Creations, Dudley Beauty, Energetix, Flavon USA, Harmony Green America, HTE USA, John Amico Haircare Products, The Kirby Company, New Earth, Orenda International, RBC Life, Regal Ware, Rena Ware International, Rexair, Sanki Global, SAS Spurilla, Simply Said, SimplyFun, Tealightful, Tristar Enterprises and Zinzino). TINA.org did not find inappropriate income claims for three companies: Red Rock Traditions, WBC Group (which is affiliated with Origami Owl), and World Book.
 
 

 

Like this story? Get our top stories by email.

User

COMMENTS

sujoy sen

10 months ago

These could be true for those who are pursuing unethical business process. I am not sure if AMWAY a leading multi level company follow such practices. Please confirm of I'm wrong.

REPLY

Tex

In Reply to sujoy sen 10 months ago

You're wrong. Do your part and forward the Oliver video link to everyone you know, except current Amway IBOs, and encourage them to do the same, and so on, à la network marketing/MLM. If you don't, then you're part of the problem.

Amway has 2 major problems, and most MLMs have at least one of these issues:

1. The products are overpriced, which makes them almost impossible to sell to customers and results in Amway being an illegal pyramid, according to the FTC and SEC websites and previous court decisions; and

2. The Tool Scam is hidden profit for the top level distributors only, and the vast majority of distributors operate at a net loss as a result. This is RICO fraud.

For recent examples, google “FTC” along with the following companies, one at a time: FHTM, BurnLounge, Zeek, TelexFree, Vemma, and Herbalife.

Although there is no federal law defining pyramid schemes, the FTC has a long and successful track record of using its Section 5 law prohibiting “unfair and deceptive” business practices to go after MLM scams: https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/business-center/guidance/multilevel-marketing which states, in part, “Not all multilevel marketing plans are legitimate. If the money you make is based on your sales to the public, it may be a legitimate multilevel marketing plan. If the money you make is based on the number of people you recruit and your sales to them, it’s probably not. It could be a pyramid scheme. Pyramid schemes are illegal, and the vast majority of participants lose money.”

Read about these and much more at www.StopTheAmwayToolScam.wordpress.com and www.AllMLMFacts.org, and email [email protected] if you want to help shut down Amway and other MLM scams.

Watch this video about Amway and other MLM scams, then forward it to everyone you know, except for current IBOs, and encourage them to do the same. When enough people know, these scams will collapse:

English version: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s6MwGeOm8iI

Spanish version: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cy-O4myeUzg

You're wrong, Amway is the largest MLM scam on the planet.

Be Wary of Freebies; the SBI Story
Consumer goods companies, often, offer a free gift on specific products or services, to entice customers. Many buyers fall for the bait, especially if freebies are offered by well-known brands and companies. However, if the freebie is an insurance cover that is suddenly withdrawn, the abrupt withdrawal can have serious consequences. This is what happened to late Surisetti Venkata Rao of...
Premium Content
Monthly Digital Access

Subscribe

Already A Subscriber?
Login
Yearly Digital Access

Subscribe

Moneylife Magazine Subscriber or MAS member?
Login

Yearly Subscriber Login

Enter the mail id that you want to use & click on Go. We will send you a link to your email for verficiation

We are listening!

Solve the equation and enter in the Captcha field.
  Loading...
Close

To continue


Please
Sign Up or Sign In
with

Email
Close

To continue


Please
Sign Up or Sign In
with

Email

BUY NOW

online financial advisory
Pathbreakers
Pathbreakers 1 & Pathbreakers 2 contain deep insights, unknown facts and captivating events in the life of 51 top achievers, in their own words.
online financia advisory
The Scam
24 Year Of The Scam: The Perennial Bestseller, reads like a Thriller!
Moneylife Online Magazine
Fiercely independent and pro-consumer information on personal finance
financial magazines online
Stockletters in 3 Flavours
Outstanding research that beats mutual funds year after year
financial magazines in india
MAS: Complete Online Financial Advisory
(Includes Moneylife Online Magazine)