Before & After Pictures Require Substantiation
Net impression and context matter
This is a cautionary tale about a skincare company that relied on a third-party app score and before-and-after images, leading to NAD scrutiny.
This company highlights a third-party app that analyzes product labels and assigns a score based on an ingredient and other assessments. One of the company’s products received a 100/100 Health Score because it does not include things like “harmful parabens,” and therefore the app listed the ingredients as “risk-free.” Third-party scores can be misleading if the basis, criteria, and limitations are not clearly stated in context. NAD determined that the webpage where the claim appeared did not make the basis of the score sufficiently clear. This is important because a score of “100/100 Health Score” can be interpreted as a broad health or safety endorsement rather than as a score based on the App’s specific ingredient methodology. The key point here is that context and net impression matter.
I love it when cases involve before and after pictures, and they highlight the epitome of implied claims, without using words. It seems the company was using pictures that showed dramatic improvements, including implied skin or eczema benefits.
From NAD case. “NAD noted that before-and-after photographs that appear in advertising constitute product performance claims and must be supported by evidence representative of what consumers can expect when using the product. The … photos depict reductions in redness associated with eczema, and reductions in fine lines and undereye bags. NAD determined that these objectively provable improvements require support, and claims related to eczema require competent and reliable scientific evidence as support.”
These are exactly the kinds of advertising review issues teams work through in Apex Compliance, especially implied claims, marketing/regulatory risk, and claim context.
Also, the company apparently relied on the National Eczema Association’s Seal of Acceptance, which can be helpful, but without evidence substantiating the improvements shown in the photos, this is not sufficient for substantiation.
Also, I’m at Expo West through Friday. Send me a note if you’d like to say hello!
Read the NAD case here.
Written by
