NAD finds ‘natural’ sunscreen claims hold up, but ‘moisturizing’ does not

As part of its routine monitoring program, the National Advertising Division requested substantiation for express and implied claims made by McNabb Nutraceuticals for Sunology.

All the product claims were looked into, but it was the stating the product contained an antiaging moisturizer that did not sit well with the watchdog.

NAD determined that it lacked jurisdiction to consider Sunology’s claims, given the evidence in the record demonstrating that the advertised product satisfies FDA criteria for broad spectrum labeling.

NAD also said that the support provided was not sufficient to substantiate product or ingredient claims for a moisturizing benefit.

In response McNabb said the company “does not dispute the NAD’s decision and agrees to discontinue is current moisturizing claims as per NAD recommendation.”​

Natural claims stand strong​

It was a different story regarding the natural claims however. NAD determined that the claims, coupled with a clear disclaimer, were supported.

NAD considered also whether the advertising at issue implied that Sunology performs as well as sunscreens containing chemicals and blocks the entire spectrum of harmful UV rays.

McNabb said that its product was formulated with a Ferulic Acid Soy Bean Oil complex developed by Dr Joseph A. Lazlo in conjunction with the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), explaining the complex had been incorporated into the product with the guidance of Dr Victor Palinczar.

McNabb had previously discontinued and modified claims regarding the product on its own accord. These were: “most sunscreens make use of man-made chemicals and preservatives; that’s why I use Sunology” and “Sunology is different.  It uses only natural ingredients to block the sun’s UV rays.”

These were changed to: “sunscreen for skin that prefers no chemicals,” followed by “active ingredients derived from nature”; which NAD commented was a proper and appropriate action.