Johnson & Johnson challenges numerous product lines before NAD
Rival Johnson & Johnson (J&J) prevails over Mommy’s Bliss.
In two simultaneous inquiries, J&J took Mommy’s Bliss – a homespun baby medicine company – to task at the National Advertising Division (NAD or the Division). At issue were several claims about two product lines.
Gripes of Wrath
First up, the oxymoronically named Mommy’s Bliss Gripe Water.
For those who don’t know what gripe water is, it’s a nonprescription treatment for fussy babies that has a long and volatile history. Developed in the 19th century by an English pharmacist, gripe water has included many disparate ingredients over the decades – alcohol, sugar, herbs and more – and has been the target of interdiction by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
J&J had problems with a number of ad claims made by Mommy’s Bliss regarding the product, including performance, speed of action and novelty claims.
Mommy’s Bliss cited “overwhelming anecdotal support” for the claims regarding the speed of the water’s effect, evidence that the NAD has declared, with agreement from the Federal Trade Commission, had “insufficient support for product performance claims absent a showing that the experience of the individual consumers is representative of the experience of consumers generally with the product.”
J&J maintained that the novelty claims – that the product was the “Very First in the U.S.” – were given the lie by numerous U.S. patent applications describing similar products.
Cough Syrup
Next up: a bevy of cough syrups and probiotic drops – diet supplements for kids. J&J objected to a number of claims that the products would make babies feel better and relieve cough symptoms. Additionally, several claims, including that the product would “ease baby’s cold symptoms,” was a “sick baby toolkit” and was suitable “for when cold & flu season hits,” conveyed the message that the products were “as effective as FDA-regulated drug products” to treat coughs, cold and flu.
The NAD took exception to Mommy’s Bliss’ general claims about making sick children “feel better” along with the specific cough relief claims, which it argued were unsupported by any evidence and should be discontinued. (Mommy’s Bliss informed the NAD that it had discontinued the claims that triggered comparisons with FDA-regulated products, so they were not considered in the investigation.)
Claims made about the probiotic drops failed, according to the Division, because the studies Mommy’s Bliss provided were conducted on groups that were not the target audience for the products. Claims for the syrups and drops including “pediatrician recommended” and “recommended by pediatricians nationwide” were also put on the chopping block.
Back to the gripe water – all of Mommy’s Bliss’ claims about the product were shot down by the NAD. In the case of the novelty “first in the U.S.” claims, the NAD noted a mismatch between the narrow definition that the company placed its product within (“gripe water products that did not contain sucrose or petroleum by-products and that were distributed by American companies”) and the general claims, which did not follow the narrow definition.
The NAD found that the rest of the claims regarding speed of action, performance and doctor recommendations were unsupported by the available evidence.
The Takeaway
It was a long day for Mommy’s Bliss, but when the dust settled, it agreed to comply with the NAD’s recommendations. The lesson, one we often reiterate here, is to have sound and sufficient substantiation for your advertising claims or risk being challenged by competitors and regulators.
Subscribe to AD-ttorneys@law Newsletter >>
Subscribe to AD-ttorneys Law Blog >>
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
