Background
Summary of Council decision:
Three issues were investigated, all of which were Upheld.
Ad description
Two TikTok ads promoting Vivo Life, a vitamin supplement company:
a. The first ad, seen on the account @ozzy_on_a_mission on 28 July 2024, featured a video of a man holding and speaking about the Vivo Life Vitamin B12 droplets product, who said, “If you get vitamin B12 injections you need to fuck them off and get these”. He then used a pipette to ingest droplets from the product. He then said, “Drop it in your mouth. It tastes amazing. I don’t need to go anywhere else to get my injection. I take them every morning. My mood’s a lot better. My energy’s better. Vitamin B12. They’ve got a deal on. Go and check it out.” A caption on the post stated, “Vitamin b12 drops. #vitaminb12, #vitamins, #b12, #menshealth”.
b. The second ad, seen on the account @karincreations on 30 July 2024, featured a video of a woman holding and speaking about the Vivo Life Vitamin B12 droplets product who said, “I felt the difference on day two. I have been tired for 30 years. Nothing really works […] So, when Vivo Life told me they have got this supplement of B12 that is just as effective as having a B12 injection, I am now on day three, and this works. I feel I’ve got energy to get up and do stuff.” Text on screen stated, “Finally a supplement that actually works on my tiredness!” A caption on the post stated “Day 2 I started to feel it and didn’t require a nanna nap! Day 3 and I am ready to tackle the housework! #b12, #supplementsthatwork, #tiktokmademebuyit”.
Issue
The complainant challenged whether the ads:
- misleadingly implied the product could treat clinical vitamin B12 deficiency; and
- irresponsibly encouraged consumers to stop taking medically prescribed vitamin B12 injections.
- The ASA also challenged whether the specific health claims featured in the ads were authorised on the Great Britain nutrition and health claims register (GB Register).
Response
1. & 2. Vivostore Ltd t/a Vivo Life did not believe their ads promoted the Vivo Life Vitamin B12 droplets product as a treatment for clinical vitamin B12 deficiency. They believed sublingual vitamin B12 was a safe and effective alternative for individuals with general vitamin B12 deficiency and provided a study to support that claim.
They did not promote the product as an alternative to seeking medical advice and believed that those who had a clinical vitamin B12 deficiency should speak to healthcare professionals before they decided to stop taking any prescribed medicines.
3. Vivo Life said the claims “My mood’s a lot better” and “I’ve got energy to get up and do stuff” were genuine customer testimonials and not direct claims about the product’s capabilities. The claims reflected the personal experiences of customers, who had described their improved mood and energy levels after using the product.
They acknowledged the claims that made reference to energy, psychological function and fatigue did not match the precise wording of the authorised health claims on the GB Register. The claims instead expressed the health benefits of the product in everyday language. They believed that, despite the wording of the claims in the ads not being exact, they were still consistent with the relevant claims on the GB Register. For example, they believed the ads reflected the authorised claims that “Vitamin B12 contributes to normal energy-yielding metabolism” and “Vitamin B12 contributes to normal functioning of the nervous system”.
Vivo Life said they would make it explicitly clear to the influencers they worked with that all claims they made must be compliant with the CAP Code. They also said they would review all their ads and remove any which implied that customers should stop taking medically prescribed vitamin B12 injections.
Assessment
1. & 2. Upheld
The CAP Code required that ads for foods, including food supplements, must not claim to treat clinical vitamin deficiencies or state or imply that a food or food supplement could prevent, treat or cure human disease.
The ASA considered the claims “my mood’s a lot better” and “my energy’s better” in ad (a), and “I feel I’ve got energy to get up and do stuff” and “Finally a supplement that actually works on my tiredness” in ad (b) would have been interpreted by consumers to mean that the Vivo Life Vitamin B12 droplets product was effective at treating the symptoms of vitamin B12 deficiency. We further considered the claims “If you get vitamin B12 injections you need to fuck them off and get these” in ad (a) and “this supplement of B12 that is just as effective as having a B12 injection” in ad (b) implied the product could treat a vitamin B12 deficiency. The ads therefore made claims that a food supplement could treat a clinical vitamin deficiency and one or more of its symptoms.
We then assessed whether the ads irresponsibly encouraged consumers to stop taking medically prescribed vitamin B12 injections. We considered that the claims “I don’t need to go anywhere else to get my injection” in ad (a) and “this supplement of B12 that is just as effective as having a B12 injection” in ad (b) implied the product was equivalent to medicines which were prescribed to treat that deficiency. We considered that in making those claims the ad suggested consumers could take the advertised supplement instead of their medically prescribed vitamin B12 injections. We therefore considered the claims were irresponsible.
Both ads claimed that a food supplement could treat a clinical vitamin deficiency and one or more of its symptoms, and irresponsibly encouraged consumers to stop taking medically prescribed vitamin B12 injections. We therefore concluded they had breached the Code.
On those points, the ads breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 1.3 (Social responsibility), 15.6.2 (Food, food supplements and associated health or nutrition claims) and 15.9 (Food supplements and other vitamins and minerals).
3. Upheld
The CAP Code required that only health claims authorised on the GB Register were permitted in marketing communications for food or food supplements. Health claims were claims that stated, suggested or implied a relationship between a food or ingredient, and health. Any authorised health claims made in an ad must meet the associated conditions of use.
We considered the claims “my mood’s a lot better” and “my energy’s better” in ad (a), and the claim “I’ve got energy to get up and do stuff” in ad (b), to be specific health claims that the product could help to regulate mood and improve energy levels, respectively. However, there were no authorised health claims relating to B12 improving mood and energy levels on the GB Register.
The claims “Vitamin B12 contributes to normal psychological function” and “Vitamin B12 contributes to normal energy-yielding metabolism” were authorised on the GB Register. We acknowledged Vivo Life’s comments that the claims in both ads simply expressed the health benefits of the product in everyday language. However, health claims must be presented clearly and without exaggeration. Marketers could exercise some flexibility in rewording a claim, provided that the reworded claim was likely to have the same meaning for consumers as the authorised health claim. The aim of the rewording was to aid consumer understanding while taking into account factors such as linguistic and cultural variations and the target population.
We considered the phrasing “contributes to” in the authorised claims was important in conveying their full meaning. It made clear that the vitamin named in the claims was only one of a number of nutrients that were involved in providing the stated beneficial physiological effect. We also considered that in the absence of the wording “contributes to”, consumers were likely to interpret the claims “my energy’s better” and “I’ve got energy to get up and do stuff” as absolute, and so we considered the claims exaggerated the meaning of the authorised health claims.
We therefore considered the claims “my energy’s better” in ad (a) and the claim “I’ve got energy to get up and do stuff” in ad (b) in relation to vitamin B12 had breached the Code.
On that point, the ads breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 15.1, 15.1.1, and 15.7 (Food, food supplements and associated health or nutrition claims).
Action
The ads must not appear again in the form complained of. We told Vivostore Ltd t/a Vivo Life not to state a food supplement could treat clinical vitamin B12 deficiency or its symptoms, nor to irresponsibly encourage consumers to stop taking medically prescribed vitamin B12 injections. We also told them not to make specific health claims about vitamin B12 unless they were authorised on the GB Register.
CAP Code (Edition 12)
1.3 15.6.2 15.9 15.1 15.1.1 15.7
