Colgate-Palmolive (India) Limited - Colgate

Recommendation: Not Upheld | Medium: Industry Member

FTCP RECOMMENDATION: The Fast Track Complaints Panel (FTCP) through a personal hearing heard the arguments of both the complainant and the Advertiser. The technical expert who reviewed the supporting evidence was present during the FTC meeting deliberations. The FTC panel noted the following submissions made by the complainant: The complainant challenged the claim, “10X Longer Lasting Cooling”, appearing on the advertiser’s product packaging as well as in the Amazon e-commerce advertisement for `Colgate MaxFresh Red Gel Toothpaste’. The complainant referred to an in-home product use consumer test conducted amongst the general population to ascertain their perception of how long the cooling attribute of the product lasts as compared to a regular fluoride toothpaste. It was stated that the consumer test revealed that the duration of cooling provided by the product does not align with what the claim “10X longer lasting cooling” conveys, and therefore, the advertiser is required to substantiate the claim with robust evidence. The complainant stated that cooling is a sensory attribute that consumers can directly perceive, and therefore this effect should be readily perceivable by average consumers. The complainant further highlighted that the claim being comparative in nature is not in compliance with the ASCI Disclaimer Guidelines, noting that the basis of comparison must be stated in the prescribed manner, whereas the disclaimer on the packaging is not positioned or sized as required. The FTC panel noted the following submissions made by the advertiser: The advertiser stated that the claim, “10X Longer Lasting Cooling”, for Colgate MaxFresh Red Gel Toothpaste is supported by the product’s proprietary UltraFreeze Technology and Icy Cooling Crystals, which are designed to provide an immediate and long lasting cooling sensation. The claim is supported by a controlled sensory study conducted by an expert sensory panel. The study using scientifically accepted methods, measures the specific attribute referenced in the claim - the duration of the cooling sensation and accurately represents the product’s sensory performance. The advertiser further stated that, unlike in-home consumer perception tests, which reflect individual subjective experience, this study uses a trained expert sensory panel to generate objective and validated results suitable for substantiating a quantifiable sensory claim. The advertiser also stated that the claim, “10X Longer Lasting Cooling”, highlights a unique attribute of the product and is not intended as a comparison with any other product. As such, the claim does not fall under the type of comparative claims referenced in the ASCI disclaimer guidelines. The FTCP Decision The FTC panel viewed the advertisement and carefully considered the submissions of both the advertiser and the complainant, and deliberated upon the matters raised. The FTC panel noted that the advertiser provided data from a sensory expert panel, and the complainant submitted data which was based on a consumer perception study reflecting individual user experiences. While the FTC panel took cognizance of both the studies provided by the complainant and the advertiser, the FTC panel noted that the claim, ‘10X Longer Lasting Cooling’, qualifies as a quantitative claim, as it specifies a measurable attribute – the duration of the cooling effect compared with a regular flouride toothpaste. Although two studies were submitted, the expert panel study was considered appropriate for this claim, as it provides measured and verifiable results. The consumer studies reflect subjective preferences and overall product liking. Given that the claim pertains to a specific sensory parameter, the expert panel findings are considered more reliable and are relied upon over consumer perception results. The FTC panel reviewed the study conducted by a sensory expert panel which tested a variant of the advertiser’s product, functionally equivalent in cooling technology. The FTC panel took note of the advertiser’s explanation that the tested product and the advertised product share an identical formulation, with the only distinction being the colorant used. The evaluation demonstrated that the toothpaste with the proprietary cooling technology provided a significantly longer lasting cooling sensation compared to a regular fluoride toothpaste. Based on this assessment, the FTC panel concluded that the claim, “10X Longer Lasting Cooling”, was substantiated and is not in contravention of Chapter I of the ASCI Code. This complaint was NOT UPHELD. Regarding the objection raised against the disclaimer, the FTC panel noted that the claim, ‘10X Longer Lasting Cooling’, appears on the front of the product packaging and is supported by a disclaimer on the back of the pack, which reads ‘vs a regular fluoride toothpaste’. The FTC panel found that the disclaimer is clearly visible and suitably linked to the claim. Accordingly, the complaint concerning the font size and placement of the disclaimer was NOT UPHELD, as it does not contravene the ASCI Guidelines for Disclaimers, which requires that disclaimers of a claim on the product packaging be presented in a prominent and visible space and should ideally be on the same panel as the claim.