Note: This advice is given by the CAP Executive about non-broadcast advertising. It does not constitute legal advice. It does not bind CAP, CAP advisory panels or the Advertising Standards Authority.
Magnetic and electromagnetic water conditioners are devices attached around water pipes; they are believed to encourage alkaline earth ions to clump together, as opposed to sticking on the sides of the pipes. Marketing communications for water conditioners typically contain claims that the devices are highly effective at reducing existing lime scale and preventing new lime scale build-up.
Over the years, the ASA has repeatedly upheld complaints about ads claiming to “solve” or “eliminate” limescale (Fast Systems Ltd, 12 January 2005, and Arnhem Technologies, 28 November 2001). The ASA considered those claims too categorical and advised advertisers to avoid implying that water conditioners would completely eliminate limescale. Claims that the devices could reduce existing limescale and inhibit the formation of new limescale were acceptable.
In 2007, the ASA upheld complaints about an ad that claimed to inhibit the formation of limescale (J.E.M. Marketing, 10 January 2007). The ad claimed the water conditioner could “immediately prevent the build-up of lime scale” and “prevent the formation of new and additional scales in your pipes and appliances”. After taking expert advice, the ASA considered that the device was unable to prevent the build-up of limescale in a single-pass domestic system or to keep calcium in suspension as claimed in the ad.
That decision resulted in a stricter approach. The ASA understands that no universally accepted theory about how these devices operate and no evidence to support the contention that the devices can inhibit scale formation generally exist. The ASA has noted that, where the devices had been shown to work, the efficacy of the product often depended on circumstances beyond the advertisers’ control, for example the type of system used or the type of water flow.
Marketers wanting to make efficacy claims for water conditions may submit evidence to the Copy Advice team. The claims allowed will depend on the standard of the evidence and will normally have to include a disclaimer along the lines of “Results will vary, depending on the water system, water flow and water type in each household”.
Marketers who do not hold convincing trials should not state or imply efficacy for the products, through claims, visuals or product names. If the product name represents a claim of efficacy, for example “Scale Remover”, marketers should include a clear disclaimer, for example “Scale Remover has not been proven to remove existing limescale” (See ‘Claims in Product Names’). Claims that are likely to be interpreted as factual and appear in a testimonial must not mislead or be likely to mislead the consumer (Rule 3.47).
Although there are no set rules for testing procedures, trials should be representative of the range of environments in which the product will be marketed for use (e.g. residential single pass systems). Marketers who are looking to conduct trials are strongly advised to submit their proposed research methodology to the CAP Copy Advice team before proceeding.
See ‘Water Softeners’.
Last modified : 03 August 2010