Shampoo advert banned over 'stronger hair' claim
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.A shampoo ad which claimed the product could make hair "up to 10 times stronger" should be banned for being misleading, the Advertising Standards Authority said.
A shampoo ad which claimed the product could make hair "up to 10 times stronger" should be banned for being misleading, the Advertising Standards Authority said.
The industry watchdog upheld five complaints against the television ad for Pantene Pro-V shampoo and conditioner, and agreed with two viewers who found it misleading and its use of scientific jargon inappropriate.
According to the ad, the products contains "our first ever formula to help replenish key aminos" and makes hair "up to 10 times stronger so it springs back to life".
But a scientific expert consulted by the ASA did not agree that the shampoo could "replenish" amino acids.
The watchdog also challenged the ad's assertion that amino acids in the product were "key".
The expert found the two amino acids most often lost from human hair were not present in the shampoo.
The ASA said viewers could be "misled" into thinking the amino acids in the product meant it would improve hair strength more than any other shampoo and conditioner.
In a statement, Proctor & Gamble said the company was "surprised and disappointed" by the ASA's decision.
"The advertisement in question was pre-cleared prior to transmission and we felt we had demonstrated convincing support for the claims it made," the statement said.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments