ASCI upheld complaints against 229 advertisements in March 2019

BestMediaInfo Bureau   Delhi, May 23, 2019

In the month of March, the Advertising Standards Council of India (ASCI) examined complaints against 344 advertisements and advertisers ensured prompt corrective action for 74 advertisements once they received the complaints from the council. ASCI’s Independent Consumer Complaints Council (CCC) upheld complaints against 229 advertisements out of 270 advertisements evaluated by them. Of these 229 advertisements, 123 belonged to the healthcare sector,83 to the education sector,seven to the food & beverages sector,two to personal care, and 14 were from the ‘others’ category.

The largest number of complaints were evaluated in the healthcare sector with over 100 advertisements being considered to be in potential violation of the Drugs & Magic Remedies (DMR) Regulations. Majority of these advertisements were on the advertisers’ web-sites promoting products for enhancement of male sexual desire, male sexual performance, female breast enhancement, cancer cure, cure for arthritis, infertility etc. There were several advertisements pertaining clinics and hospitals making unsubstantiated and superlative claims.

In one instance, the advertiser claimed to hold a Limca Book of record for performing the highest number of surgeries in a certain span of time. The claims were inadequately substantiated and were misleading by exaggeration. Another clinic claimed to cure piles in a single dose whereas another proclaimed itself to be the best sexologist in India.

D Shivakumar

D Shivakumar, Chairman, ASCI, said, “ASCI and Ministry of AYUSH have concluded their second year of collaboration in March 2019. Under the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU), ASCI was given a mandate for comprehensive Suo Motu surveillance of potentially misleading advertisements in the AYUSH sector and to keep a tab on print and electronic advertisements related to treatments with Ayurveda, Unani, Siddha and Homoeopathy medicines and potential violations of the Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 1954. Over the two years, under the MoU with Ministry of AYUSH, ASCI has looked into over 1200 advertisements of the AYUSH sector. It is important to take cognizance of the growing influence of Digital Media on consumers and the misleading advertisements through various web-sites exploiting consumers’ lack of knowledge. As per our data, while there has been a significant decrease in the incidence of misleading advertisements as awareness of the AYUSH-ASCI collaboration is increasing, the joint efforts need to be sustained to effectively curb objectionable advertisements. ”

 Healthcare: - Total of 123 advertisements complained against

• Direct Complaints (93 advertisements)
• Suo Motu Surveillance by ASCI (30 advertisements)

Education: - Total of 83 advertisements complained against

• Direct Complaints (Four advertisements)
• Suo Motu Surveillance by ASCI (79 advertisements)

Food and Beverages: - Total of seven advertisements complained against

• Direct Complaints (Three advertisements)
• Suo Motu Surveillance by ASCI (Four advertisements)

Personal Care: - Total of two advertisement complained against

• Direct Complaints ( Two advertisement)

Others: - Total of 14 advertisements complained against

• Direct Complaints ( 10 advertisements)
• Suo Motu Surveillance by ASCI (Four advertisements)

Direct Complaints

The advertisements given below were complained against by general public or by industry members. Of the 157 advertisements, four cases were informally resolved as the advertisers’ ensured prompt corrective action immediately post receiving the complaints. Complaints against 112 advertisements were upheld by the CCC. Of these 112 advertisements, 93 belonged to Healthcare sector, four belonged to the Education sector, three belonged to the Food & Beverages sector,  two to Personal Care sector and ten to the ‘Others’ category.

Healthcare 

Numerous complaints in healthcare sector were found to be misleading that exploit consumers’ lack of knowledge and lead to widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers.

1. Aanvii Hearing Centre (Aanvii Hearing Device): The advertisement’s claim, “Signia stiletto, world’s slimmest rechargeable hearing device” was incorrectly worded and misleading by exaggeration.
2. Waves Wellness (iBrow 3D Eyebrow enhancement): The advertisement’s claim, "Get your dream eyebrows instantly with India's 1st brand of 3D eyebrow enhancement services” was misleading by exaggeration. It was observed that prior to advertiser’s brand, there were other brands / clinics in existence offering permanent eye brow shaping services.
3. Swasthya (Super Speciality hospital): The advertisement’s claim, as “Charitable Trust”, was not substantiated with supporting evidence and considered a misrepresentation. The advertiser did not provide any evidence of the institution being a trust.
4. AIMIL Pharmaceuticals (I) Ltd (Lukosin): The website advertisement’s claims, “A great research breakthrough from DRDO ”, “Research product of ministry of defence” , “Brings revolution in skin health care in association with AIMIL”, “Over 40,000 patients benefitted” makes references to the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) of India, a Government Institution. The reference to DRDO violates AYUSH’ advisory of September 2018 that refrains advertisers / advertising agencies from using the name of Government department and institutions in advertisements of Ayurveda, Siddha, Unani and Homeopathy Drugs. The advertiser did not provide any evidence of DRDO having approved the specific product artwork or web-site claims appearing in conjunction with reference to DRDO. The text used in the advertisement in reference to DRDO in the advertisement is misleading by ambiguity, implication, and exploits consumers’ lack of knowledge.
5. Charak Pharma Pvt. Ltd (Kofol Chewable Tablets) - The advertisement’s claim, “Trusted by Doctors”, was inadequately substantiated as the data provided was not adequate on a statistically significant representative sample size to conclusively prove the claim. The claim is misleading by ambiguity.

The following advertisements were considered to be, prima facie, in violation of The Drugs & Magic Remedies (DMR) Act when the advertisements were viewed in totality with the texts and visuals: The majority of these were advertiser web-sites carrying the objectionable claims.

Education

The CCC found that the claims made in following four advertisements were misleading claims that exploit consumers’ lack of knowledge and lead to widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers. The advertisements were found to be in violation of ASCI Guidelines for Advertising for Educational Institutions

1. NIIT Ltd: Thee advertisement’s claim, “5000 Assured jobs”, was misleading by exaggeration, ambiguity and implication and since the students were given a provisional offer an “assured job” could not be promised to the students. Claim, “50,000 Students Placed” was not substantiated with authentic supporting data such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their institute in the banking sector, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students, nor any independent audit or verification certificate.
2. Wooe.in: The advertisement’s claim, “Purchase package now and get 100% cashback after 24 hours”, is misleading by omission, there was no disclaimer mentioning the terms and conditions for the 100% cashback. Moreover a student/ complainant, who purchased the test series package, was informed that he will only receive the cashback if he refers the website to another 300 students and get them to register with the advertiser.
3. Elite Overseas Consultant Education: The advertisement’s claim, “Free IELTS coaching”, was not substantiated with any verifiable supporting data to prove that the advertiser offers free IELTS coaching to students, nor did the advertiser provide any terms and conditions that were applicable for the free coaching claimed. The claim was considered to be misleading by ambiguity.
4. Ample Dreams Educom: The advertisement’s claims, “Full course of Mathematics and Science in just seven days” and “100% Result”, were not substantiated with verifiable supporting data.  The claims are misleading by exaggeration.

Food and Beverage

The CCC found that the claims made in following three advertisements were misleading that exploit consumers’ lack of knowledge and lead to widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers.

1. Gujarat Cooperative Milk Marketing Federation Ltd (Amul): The advertisement’s claims, (in Guajarati) as translated in English, “Only Amul ghee means a promise of purity” and “Only Amul Ghee is 100% pure, is a promise of 36 lakhs farmers”, stating that “only” Amul is 100% pure and implying that other ghee brands are not, were not substantiated with comparative data of the advertiser’s product and other ghee products.  The claims are misleading by implication. 
2. Ashok & Co. – Pan Bahar Ltd (Pan Bahar Crystal): The radio advertisement’s claim, “World’s first pan masala whose ingredients are still a trade secret”, was not substantiated with any verifiable comparative data worldwide, of the advertiser’s pan masala product and other pan masala products to prove that they were the first whose ingredients are still a trade secret, or through an audited report or third-party validation. The claim “World’s first” is misleading by exaggeration. In radio advertisement, the disclaimer “Chewing Pan Masala can be injurious to health”, was not played at the same speed as the rest of the advertisement.
3. Pitambari Products Private Limited (Pitambari ShaptaShakti Sesame Oil): The advertisement’s claim, “Best edible sesame oil”, was not substantiated with comparative technical test reports of the advertiser’s product versus other edible sesame oil brands.  The claim is misleading by exaggeration.

Personal Care

1. Everlove Cosmetics and Beauty Care Pvt Ltd (Baali Ayurved Herbal Hair Oil): The print advertisement’s claims “100% herbal” and “22 Ayurvedic Herbs” for an ayurvedic herbal hair oil was not substantiated; claim “No Side Effects”, was not substantiated with evidence of product safety. Claim “Dermatologist approved” was not substantiated with any data for the product’s approval amongst dermatologists. The visual on the product package showing celebrity Sonali Bendre endorsing the product was found to be in violation of ASCI’s Guidelines for Celebrities in Advertising as the advertiser did not submit any evidence of celebrity’s due diligence. The visual of the celebrity when seen in conjunction with these claims are likely to mislead consumers regarding the product efficacy

2. Colgate – Palmolive (India) Limited: In the TV and YouTube advertisements claim “Bilkul doodh ki tarah Colgate Strong Teeth natural Calcium badhata hai aur aapke datonko banata hai aandar se strong” the claim “Bilkul Dooth ki tarah” and visual representation of numerical equivalence of calcium in both (milk and CDC) and the comparison of action of CDC with that of milk was considered to be incorrect. It is explicitly clear that the Fluoride action on the Saliva helps return of natural Calcium from Saliva to the mineral deficient enamel through the remineralisation process. Therefore, it is explicitly clear that the Toothpaste does not add or increase natural Calcium from within the tooth. The Advertiser’s contention that Milk is shown as an analogy to show how the Toothpaste increases the Calcium in the tooth, cannot be sustained at all, as it is highly misleading. There is no dispute scientifically, no toothpaste can increase Natural Calcium. Even the small quantity of Calcium in the toothpaste is not ingested in the body, hence, it cannot be compared with milk which provides Calcium after ingestion. The disclaimer in the TVC - “Rachanatmak Prastuti. Colgate Dental Cream fluoride action dwara laar se natural calcium badhane main madad karti hai” was in contravention of the ASCI Guidelines for Disclaimers in Advertising. For the claim “Natural Calcium”,  the advertiser stated that “Natural Calcium” reference on the front of pack is not with respect to Calcium Carbonate but is with reference to Calcium present in the saliva. The disclaimer corresponding to the asterisk reads as “Helps add Natural Calcium”. There was no reference to saliva as a source for this calcium. This claim was considered to be misleading by omission and implication. The claim distorts facts, exploits consumers’ lack of knowledge and is likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment. The pack claim was also in contravention of the ASCI Guidelines for Disclaimers.

Others

The CCC found that the claims made in following 10 advertisements were misleading claims that exploit consumers’ lack of knowledge and lead to widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers.

1. Red Chillies Entertainment Pvt Ltd (Film – Zero): The print advertisement promo for Hindi movie `Zero’ showed star ratings given by various publications for the movie. The promo claimed four star ratings by Hindustan, whereas the review article by Hindustan had 2.5 stars rating. Based on this observation and in the absence of comments from the advertiser, the advertisement – promo claiming “Four stars by Hindustan” for the movie `Zero’ was misleading by misrepresentation of facts and exaggeration.
2. Tata Motors Ltd (Tata Motors): The comparison made regarding the safety of the vehicle in the advertisement’s claim, "TATA NEXON – INDIA’S SAFEST CAR. Going Swift is not safe for your family" was not factual and was not substantiated, and there is likelihood of the consumer being misled as a result of comparison.  The reference made to `Swift’ in the caption, “Going Swift is not safe for your family”, when seen in conjunction with the picture of Maruti Swift car, unfairly denigrated another vehicle in the four wheeler category directly. The claim is misleading by exaggeration and implication.
3. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd (Maruti Suzuki): The advertisement’s claims, “Enjoy the month of March with exciting offers from Maruti Suzuki”, and “Bigger Savings” showing images of various models of Maruti Suzuki with their prices, were not substantiated with any supporting verifiable data. The disclaimer stating that the offer was on select car models was not substantiated with a detailed list of the models on which discount was available and evidence of customers who had availed the said offer was not provided. The claim offer was misleading by exaggeration and also contravened ASCI Guidelines for Disclaimers in advertising.
4. Godrej Properties Limited (Godrej Air): The advertisement’s claim, “Homes with 10X Enhanced Air Quality” was inadequately substantiated. The test report that was submitted was for the site office and not for a typical flat, where variables like windows and height and wind may affect the results; there could be seasonal variations as well in terms of outdoor and indoor air quality. It was unclear if these were factored in while arriving at the specific numerical claim. The CCC was of the opinion that a site office data cannot be extrapolated to a typical flat or under real life conditions. The advertisement had visuals of outdoor spaces, but no data was provided as regards to outdoor air quality of jogging tracks, garden roof and terrace gardens. The air quality comparison is misleading by ambiguity and implication and the advertisement also contravened ASCI Guidelines for Disclaimers in advertising.
5. Vodafone India Ltd (Vodafone Supernet 4G): The advertisement’s claim, “Adding a tower every hour in crowded places”, was not substantiated with any verifiable data of the hourly roll-out of the towers/sites in crowded places, or through an independent third party validation. The claim is misleading by exaggeration.
6. Zee Business (Only One Awaaz Ruled the Budget Day): In the advertisement’s claim, “Only One Awaaz Ruled the Budget Day, Zee Business", the data provided in the ad-mailer and qualified with the disclaimer is not a direct output of BARC’s BMW User Interface and the same is not permitted for public use. Using a data point by extrapolating or interpolating BMW outputs is not permitted by the BARC Guidelines. Claims, “While the National Budget Day ushered de-growth for CNBC Awaaz, CNBC TV18 in terms of TVT's, our performance continued to shoot off the charts" and "We are India's most preferred Business News Channel" were inadequately substantiated, distorting facts and were misleading by exaggeration.
7. ARG Outlier Media (Republic TV, Republic Bharat): The advertiser’s claims “India's No. 1 News Network” and “18.4 Crore Viewers” / “184 Million Viewers” were misleading. The television promo was not accompanied with any disclaimer to indicate the source of claim. The TV promo was in contravention of BARC advisory as well as ASCI guidelines on disclaimers. 
8. N. Ranga Rao and Sons (Cycle Sandalum Agarbatti): The advertisement’s claim, “One stick of Cycle Sandalum has the power of two”, was inadequately substantiated and is misleading by exaggeration. The sample size of the study provided by the advertiser was not adequate to arrive at statistically significant and reproducible test results. Furthermore, the test was a user study and not an expert panel study.
9. Wonderchef Home Appliances Pvt Ltd (Wonderchef Nutri-Bot 480ml (Steel): The advertisement’s claim, “Steel Micro-Filter - to extract the goodness of fresh fruits and veggies”, was inadequately substantiated, and is misleading by ambiguity. The claim is misleading per se - the filter does nothing or facilitates anything to extract anything into the water i.e. material infused from, for instance, cucumber or strawberry. The filter's function is to prevent the solids from getting into the mouth while drinking the water infused with fruits and/or vegetables.
10. Preethi Kitchen Appliances Pvt Ltd.  (Preethi BluFlame Valentino): The advertisement’s claim “Saves up to five days cooking gas”,  is misleading by ambiguity, as the advertiser could not provide a specific numerical value of five days LPG saving.

Suo Motu surveillance by ASCI for misleading advertisements

The advertisements given below were picked up through ASCI’s Suo Motu surveillance of Print and TV media via the National Advertisement Monitoring Services (NAMS) project. Out of 187 advertisements that were picked, 70 cases were informally resolved wherein the advertisers promptly confirmed that the advertisement are being withdrawn immediately post receiving the complaints. Complaints against all remaining 117 advertisements were upheld. Of these 117 advertisements, 79 belonged to the Education sector, 30 advertisements belonged to the Healthcare sector, four belonged to the Food & Beverages sector and four belonged to the ‘Others’ category.

The CCC found that the claims made in following seven advertisements were misleading claims that exploit consumers’ lack of knowledge and lead to widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers. The advertisements were also found to be in violation of ASCI Guidelines for Advertising for Educational Institutions.

1. Al Career Academy: The advertisement’s claims, “Golden opportunity to join Military and Police” and “Join to get guaranteed success”, were not substantiated with supporting evidence of students who were successfully placed in the military and police sector, on completion of their training by the advertiser’s academy.
2. Chennai Public School: The advertisement’s claim, “Education National Excellence Awards- Best Educational Initiative”, was inadequately substantiated and is misleading by ambiguity and omission to mention the source for the same.  The claim, “World's Greatest Brands - Asia and GCC by URS and PWC”, was inadequately substantiated, and is misleading by exaggeration and omission to mention the source for the same. 
3. Jadon’s Group of Studies-Jadons IAS: The advertisement’s claim, “The institute providing highest results since 23 years”, was not substantiated and is misleading by exaggeration.
4. Hello Kids: The advertisement’s claim, “Bangalore’s Largest Chain of Play School”, was not substantiated with any verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s play school chain and other play school chains in Bangalore, to prove that they are larger than the rest, or through an audited report or third-party validation. The claim was misleading by exaggeration.
5. Wisdom High International School ICSE: The advertisement’s claim, “Best School Award for four consecutive years”, was misleading as it was not directly corroborated with a single award to substantiate the claim “Best School Award”.
6. Red Leaf Educational Consultants Pvt Ltd: The advertisement’s claim, “Trusted brand of Delhi”, was not substantiated with any market research data, or brand trust report or through a third party validation and is misleading.
7. Orane International School of Beauty & Wellness: The advertisement’s claim, “Awarded World’s Greatest Brand” was inadequately substantiated and is misleading by ambiguity and exaggeration. The claim was not qualified to mention the source and date of the research.

Complaints against advertisements of 72 educational institutes listed below are UPHELD mainly because of unsubstantiated claims AND/OR misleading claims that they provide 100% placement/100% placement assistance AND/OR they claim to be the No.1 in their respective fields.

Shanti Educational Initiatives Ltd (Shanti Juniors ), Aayam Career Institute, Safety Officer Training Academy (SOTA), Pragnya Academy IAS, K2 Learning Resources Pvt Ltd- Career Utsav (K2 Learning), Gian Jyoti Institute of Management & Technology, Gyanodaya Classes, Mothers Public School, MMW Education Centre, Jeevan Engineers Academy, J. Sons Merchant Navy Institute, Alternative Learning Systems (ALS), Sri Chaitanya Techno School, International Institute of Hotel Management, Raj Krupa Institute of Nursing, Drona Group of Institution, Adamas University, Baluni Classes, Narayana Group of School, Winner Institute, First Crop Montessori School, ABS Foundation, A. R. Hospital and Trauma Center/ A. R. Paramedical Institute and Research Center, Jawed Habib Academy, KIIT School of Rural Management, Elite Institute Of Fashion Design, Gangasheel School of Nursing, G.D. Goenka International School, IITian's Prashikshan Kendra Pvt. Ltd, Modi Public School, Aptech Ltd- Arena Animation Academy, Sanfort, Everest Group of Institute, Prabha G Educational Institution, Nirnay Academy, Microtek College of Management and Technology, Sri Chaitanya Techno School, Lakshya Defence Academy, Expedient Healthcare Marketing Pvt.Ltd.Healthians.com, Godavari Institute of Engineering and Technology, Holy Covent English Medium School & Junior College, Global Defence Academy, Sojatia Classes, Mody School, Presidency University, Raj Insulations and Training Center, S.C. Guria Institute of Management and Law College,

Sachdeva College, Simran Ablaze IAS Academy, Shemrock MOMS Pride, Educationista Events of Exhibition - Prestigious Schools Exhibition, Rankers League, Ours Academy, Doon International School, ASM Group of Institutes, Sandip University, Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham Amrita Business School, Bharati Vidyapeeth’s Institute of Management Studies and Research, Dronacharya Public School Arya Classes, Glaamour School of Fashion & Interiors, Gurukul Neeti, Montessori Child Center, Apti Plus, DLJR Coaching Institute, SAL School of Architecture, Shakti School, The Motivator, Venus Public School, ILI Foreign Language Institute Pvt. Ltd., Times Scholars Gurukul, Kollywood Academy and Scius Systems Pvt Ltd-Champions Talent.

Healthcare

Complaints against the following 17 advertisements are UPHELD primarily due to unsubstantiated claims that exploit consumers’ lack of knowledge and could lead to widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers.

1. Lifezen Healthcare Pvt Ltd-Tuskca Calcium : The advertisement’s claim , “India's No.1 Chewable Calcium”, was not substantiated with comparative data of the advertiser’s product and other similar chewable calcium tablets in India, such as market research survey or third-party validation to prove that it is in leadership position (No.1) than the rest. The source for the claim was not indicated in the print advertisement and the claim was found to be misleading by exaggeration.
2. Zydus Wellness- (Sugar Free Green Veda): The advertisement’s claim, “One of a kind Ayurvedic sweet drops” and “Made from stevia leaf which packs the goodness of Ayurveda”, were not substantiated, and are misleading by exaggeration. The advertiser did not provide product specific details such as composition / licence / pack artwork, nor any relevant extracts of Ayurvedic references from Classical Books.
3. Ivy Elite Institute of Orthopaedics & Joint Replacement: The advertisement’s claim, “Limca Book of Records - Performed the Most (438) Joint Replacement Surgeries in one month”,  “Performed the Most (140) Joint Replacement Surgeries in one week”,  “Performed the Most (1001) Joint Replacement Surgeries in Least Time (84 Days)”, and “Performed the Most (3017) Joint Replacement surgeries in one Year”, were inadequately substantiated.  The Advertiser did not provide any logistics details, nor details of the process how the awarding body (Limca) arrived at the conclusion or assessed the medical treatment to be considered acceptable for Limca award qualification.  Furthermore, the treatment procedure was performed by a team of doctors and was not done by a single doctor, as implied in the advertisement; the claims are misleading by exaggeration.
4. Goyal Clinic: The advertisement’s claim, (in Hindi) “Bavaseer ka ek pudiya mein illaaz” (“Treats Piles in one dose.”) was not substantiated with supporting clinical evidence, and is misleading by gross exaggeration. 
5. Ashraya Holistic Medicare : The advertisement’s claim,  “Reduce weight and fat, without regressive exercises or dieting”, and “Reduce weight by ten to fifteen  kilograms”, were not substantiated with supporting clinical evidence and with treatment efficacy data, and are misleading by exaggeration.
6. Dr. Taj Dawakhana: The advertisement’s claim, “India's best herbal sexual health clinic” source for the claim was not indicated in the advertisement. The advertiser did not provide any evidence of the medical qualification and registration of the doctor. The superlative claim is misleading by exaggeration.
7. Dr. B. K. Kashayp (Kashyap Clinic): The advertisement’s claim, “The only hospital providing solution for childless couple, problems related to sexual diseases” was not substantiated with verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s clinic and other similar clinics, to prove that they are the only hospital providing treatment for claimed problems / diseases. The claim “Well-known psycho sexologist”, was not substantiated with details of the doctor’s medical qualifications, his registration details and any supporting data to prove that he is a well-known psycho sexologist. The claims are misleading by exaggeration. 
8. Dr. Sheikh Dawakhana: The advertisement’s claim, “Best Sexologist in India” was inadequately substantiated. The claim “Asia's Best Ayurvedic Sexual Health Clinic”, was not substantiated with any verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s clinic and other similar Ayurvedic sexual health clinics in Asia, to prove that they are better than the rest, or through a third-party validation. The claims are misleading by exaggeration.
9. Parekhs Hospital: The advertisement’s claim “Sure shot treatment for any trouble of foot and paw”, was not substantiated with supporting clinical evidence, and is misleading by exaggeration.  The print advertisement listed several ailments associated with foot and paw, however the advertisers did not provide any details of the treatment procedure for claiming, sure shot treatment for them.
10. Dr. Sid Laboratories Korizin (Vee-Gel): The advertisement’s claim, “Restore tone and tightness” was not substantiated with evidence of product efficacy. The advertiser did not provide product specific details such as composition/license/pack artwork or samples, nor evidence of the ingredients present in the product.  There were no authentic, published scientific references to support the claim; and is grossly misleading.
11. Shaurya Multi Speciality Hospital:  The advertisement’s claim “Replacement by US FDA approved joints having longevity of more than 30 years”, was not substantiated with supporting evidence. The claim is misleading by exaggeration.
12. Dr. A’s Clinic : The advertisement’s claim, “World's #1 top ranked hair transplant centre”, was not substantiated with any verifiable worldwide comparative data for the ranking claimed, of the advertiser’s clinic and other hair transplant centre, to prove that it is in leadership position (#1) than the rest. The claim is misleading by exaggeration and implication.
13. Nova IVI Fertility Private Limited: The advertisement’s claim (translated from Hindi) “Highest success rate in India”, was and misleading by exaggeration .The advertiser did not provide any authentic verifiable data about their success rate and any rationale as to why this should be considered among the highest.
14. Dr. S.K. Jains Burlington Clinic Pvt Ltd: The advertisement’s claim, “Honoured with International Sexologist Award”, was not substantiated with a copy of the qualifications of the doctor who claims to have received the award, details of his registration, copy of the award certificate, criteria for granting the award, references of the awards received such as the year, source, and name of the awarding body. The claim is misleading by exaggeration.
15. Prakritik Chikitsa Trust & Yoga Training Research Center: The advertisement’s claim, “Provides successful treatment for incurable diseases with naturopathy”, was not substantiated with supporting clinical evidence, and is misleading by gross exaggeration.
16. Dr. Care Homeopathy: The advertisement’s claim, (translated from Kannada) “Perfect treatment for incurable diseases” and “Treatment for asthma” were not substantiated with supporting clinical evidence, and are misleading by gross exaggeration. The visual in the advertisement also shows a man using inhaler pump when read in conjunction with the claim “Perfect treatment for Incurable diseases” implies cure for Asthma which is also misleading by gross exaggeration. 
17. Baba Nutrition Centre: The advertisement’s claim, “World's No. 1 Weight Management Programme”, was not substantiated with any verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s weight management program and other similar weight management programs worldwide, to prove that it is better than all the rest in providing the weight management, or through an independent third party validation. The source for the claim was not indicated in the advertisement and was considered misleading by exaggeration and implication.

The following advertisements were considered to be, prima facie, in violation of The Drugs & Magic Remedies (DMR) Act when the advertisement was viewed in totality with the texts and visuals: 

The following advertisements were considered to be, prima facie, in violation of The Drugs & Cosmetics Rules, and are being referred to the Ministry of AYUSH

Food and Beverage

1. Rasna Private Limited- Rasna Native Haat:  The advertisement’s claims “India's most trusted family-owned brand”, was not substantiated with any market research data, or  verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s brand and other similar juice brands in India to prove their brand is the most trusted brand over others, or through a third party validation. Claim – “World's largest drink concentrate manufacturer”, was not substantiated with any verifiable comparative data worldwide, to prove that the advertiser is larger than other drink concentrate manufacturers, nor any independent audit or verification certificate. The claims are misleading by gross exaggeration and are likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers.
2. Priti Trade Links (ALA Fruit Juice):  The advertisement shows an FSSAI logo in a non-standard format, implying that it is an endorsement from FSSAI. The improper use of FSSAI logo was in violation of the FSSAI advisory and was misleading by implication that the product has been tested/approved/endorsed by FSSAI. 
3. Sri Saravana Oil Mill (Noyyal Wood Pressed Oil): The advertisement shows an FSSAI logo in a non-standard format, implying that it is an endorsement from FSSAI. The improper use of FSSAI logo was misleading by implication that the product has been tested/approved/endorsed by FSSAI, and also was in violation of the FSSAI advisory.
4. Happymate Foods Limited (Xplor Organic Lemon Grass Herbal Tea) – The advertisement claim of providing tea that was “100% Organic”, was not substantiated with claim support data, and misleading by exaggeration.  The claim is likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers.

Others

The CCC found that the claims in following four advertisements were misleading and exploited consumers’ lack of knowledge leading to widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers

1. Lenovo India Pvt. Ltd IdeaPad 520: The advertisement’s claim, “What’s included in the box – Office H&S 2016” was not substantiated, and is misleading by omission of the conditions to avail this perpetual license.   
2. AHA Safety Gas India-Aanya Inc: The advertisement’s claim, (in Kannada), as translated in English, “Guarantee that the gas that comes for 30 days can be used up to 40 days”, and “20% savings”, were not substantiated and are misleading by exaggeration. 
3. Chawla Association- (Saarthi ERickshaw): The advertisement’s claim, “India's best E-rickshaw” was not substantiated with any market survey data, or any verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s product and other e-rickshaws manufactured in India, to prove that their product is better than the rest, or through a third-party validation. The claim is misleading by exaggeration.
4. Windlass Developers Pvt. Ltd: The advertisement’s claim, “Awarded Best Township project of North India” was not substantiated with copy of the award certificates, criteria for granting the awards, references of the awards received such as the year, source, and name of the awarding body. The source for the claim was not indicated in the advertisement and the claim is misleading by exaggeration.

Info@BestMediaInfo.com