Lagom Labs Private Limited - Nua

Recommendation: Not Upheld | Medium: Industry Member

The ASCI had approached the advertiser for its response in addressing the grievances of the complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request to respond to the same. The advertiser was offered an option to seek an Informal Resolution (IR) of the complaint by modifying or withdrawing the claim on the product packaging and in the advertisement, or alternately to substantiate the claims with supporting data. The advertiser was also offered an opportunity for a telecon with the ASCI Secretariat, which they did not avail and submitted their response. The advertiser opted for an Informal Resolution (IR) of the complaint and requested an extension to submit their formal response. As a special gesture, an additional three business days were granted to allow them to submit the proposed modifications to the advertisement. However the advertiser did not avail the IR and submitted their response. The advertiser in their response stated that the claim relates to skin irritation arising from product use, not to all forms of irritation, and that the packaging provides necessary disclaimers. The claim is substantiated through dermatological testing for sanitary napkins and a clinical application study for tampons. The advertiser expressed willingness to modify the display of disclaimers on their hoardings and its website. As claim support data, the advertiser provided a copy of certification that the product is dermatologically tested, safe on skin and non-irritant. The advertiser’s response, along with the supporting claim data, was referred to an independent ASCI technical expert for review. The expert’s opinion was shared with both the complainant and the advertiser for their additional submissions. The complainant stated that they have no additional comments regarding the expert opinion provided. The advertiser subsequently participated in a zoom meeting with the technical expert and the ASCI Secretariat to discuss their submissions. Following this meeting, the advertiser provided the ingredient lists for `Nua Essential Roll-On’ and `Nua Sanitary Pads’, along with test reports for the softness test and coefficient of friction test for Nua Sanitary Pads. The additional submissions made by the advertiser were shared with the technical expert for final opinion. The Consumer Complaints Council (CCC) viewed the product packaging, the Website advertisement, considered the complaint, the advertiser’s response along with the claim support data, and the final opinion of the expert presented at the meeting. The claim “Zero Irritation. Promise” was assessed based on the documents and submissions provided by the advertiser. The CCC noted that the claim refers to physical skin irritation and is supported by test reports and clinical studies conducted in accordance with established dermatological standards. The product was evaluated for normal skin types, and the results indicated that it does not cause irritation under standard use conditions. The testing and the certifications submitted confirmed that the product does not cause skin irritation or sensitization. The CCC observed that the product packaging includes an appropriate disclaimer noting that the results are based on dermatological evaluation and may vary with individual sensitivity or existing skin conditions. The supporting documentation and data substantiate the claim, indicating that it is backed by clinical evidence and is not misleading for its intended use. The CCC further noted that the claim is validated for normal skin types and recommended adding a clear disclaimer on both the packaging and the website to specify that the claim applies to normal skin, to avoid consumers from being misled. The CCC noted that the advertiser has agreed to update the disclaimers on its hoardings and website to ensure the information is clearly presented to consumers. Based on this assessment, the CCC concluded that the product packaging and the website claim, `Zero Irritation. Promise’, was substantiated. The said claim is not in contravention of Chapter I of the ASCI Code. This complaint was NOT UPHELD.