Zywie Ventures Private Limited - OZiva+

Recommendation: 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 claims 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 in their response stated that, “….. the phrase '#1 Hair Growth Serum - Scalp Rebalance' represents a marketing communication designed to illustrate our unique approach and differentiation within the hair care industry. The claim underscores our innovative focus on rebalancing the scalp microbiome, which sets our product apart from traditional solutions. The claim of an average growth of 23,800 new hairs is supported by a clinical study conducted by …..a globally recognized leader in ingredient development…. conducted this study on Redensyl® (3% concentration), an active ingredient in our product, to assess its efficacy in promoting hair regrowth. The claim that our product "Works Better than Minoxidil" is based on a comparative ex vivo study conducted using the well-accepted Philpott hair follicle culture model. This study directly evaluated the efficacy of Redensyl (1%) and Minoxidil (1%) on hair follicles extracted from patients with androgenic alopecia”. As claim support data, the advertiser submitted the following documents – (1) Details of studies, scientific trials, and Publications, (2) Product label, (3) Product approval License. The advertiser’s response along with the claim support data was referred to an Independent technical expert of ASCI for an opinion in the matter. The expert’s opinion was then shared with the complainant and the advertiser for making additional submissions. The complainant did not respond to the expert opinion. However, the advertiser had a telecon/meeting with the ASCI Secretariat and the technical expert via zoom video conference to discuss their submissions. Post this meeting, the advertiser responded that “they are in the process of implementing the necessary modifications to their communication for `OZIVA Advanced Hair Serum product’, and will be modifying the claims with additional appropriate disclaimers”. The advertiser further provided images of the revised claims. The additional submissions made by the advertiser were shared with the technical expert for final opinion. The Consumer Complaints Council (CCC) viewed the Website advertisement (https://www.oziva.in/products/oziva-advanced-hair-growth-serum-to-rebalance-scalp-microbiome-30-ml?variant=41706668326971&utm_source=google&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=GC_Hair_Nutrition_Hair_Serum_Search_Brand_300424&utm_agid=161898060139&utm_term=oziva+hair+growth+serum&gad_source=1&gclid=Cj0KCQjwgrO4BhC2ARIsAKQ7zUnUl-mYsQQvW27T4Nh-L131LepLatTvnkOofuDZBbx8cT94IkgH5JIaArFREALw_wcB), considered the complaint, the advertiser’s response along with the claim support data, and the expert’s final opinion presented at the meeting. Claim – “#1 hair growth Serum- Scalp Rebalance” The CCC observed that the advertiser has submitted a research paper on the effectiveness of Lindera Strychnifolia root extract in restoring a healthy scalp microbiome (bacteria and fungi) after 83 days of treatment. According to the advertiser, the claim emphasizes that the serum focuses on rebalancing the scalp microbiome, a key feature that distinguishes it from traditional hair growth products. The CCC discussed that the research paper submitted outlines the procedure for preparing and characterizing the extract, and evaluating its impact on the scalp microbiome of both healthy volunteers and alopecia patients. The advertiser has not provided details on the standardization and characterization of the plant extract used in their product, to show that it matches the extract reported in the referenced research paper. The advertiser has not submitted clinical evidence for product efficacy that evaluates the impact of the serum on the scalp microbiome both with and without the product to show that it has effect on rebalancing the scalp. The CCC further discussed that the proposed modification by addition of a disclaimer regarding the product's ranking does not provide any scientific evidence to back up the claim that the product has the ability to balance the scalp's condition. Claim – “Clinically proven to deliver results in 4 months Grows 23,800 new hairs” (disclaimer -Hair count delivered from clinically studied ingredient redensyl) The CCC observed that the advertiser has used the results from a clinical study that specifically tested the effectiveness of 3% Redensyl (an active ingredient) in promoting hair regrowth. However, while the study focused on Redensyl alone, the product being advertised contains not just Redensyl, but other ingredients as well. The CCC discussed that the results of the clinical study show how effective Redensyl alone can be for hair regrowth, but the final product being a combination of several ingredients could have a different outcome in terms of overall efficacy. The advertiser has not provided a clinical study that evaluates the entire product, which contains not only Redensyl but also additional ingredients. The CCC further discussed that while the advertiser may have included a disclaimer regarding the hair count, the claim implies that the users will see guaranteed results after 4 months of use. Claim – “Works better than Minoxidil” The CCC observed that the advertiser has presented results from a clinical study comparing the effects of 1% Redensyl and 1% Minoxidil on hair follicles. The study claims that Redensyl shows better efficacy than Minoxidil in stimulating hair growth. The CCC discussed that the advertiser has not provided specific details of the study such as how the study was conducted, the number of participants involved, the duration of the study, and the methodology used to measure the efficacy of the products tested in the study. The CCC further discussed that the study results do not compare the actual serum formulation (which contains Redensyl) with Minoxidil in the same conditions, making it unclear whether the superior efficacy is due to Redensyl alone or the differences in the formulations. The changes in ingredients can have an impact on the efficacy of a formulation, therefore without this comparison, the claim cannot be validated. The CCC then highlighted that the claim being revised with the inclusion of a disclaimer does not support the claim as the data provided is insufficient. Based on this assessment, the CCC concluded that the claims, “#1 hair growth Serum- Scalp Rebalance”, “Clinically proven to deliver results in 4 months Grows 23,800 new hairs (disclaimer -Hair count delivered from clinically studied ingredient redensyl)”, and “Works better than Minoxidil”, were inadequately substantiated. The claims are misleading by exaggeration and are likely to lead to widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers. The source for the claims is not indicated in the advertisement. The said claims contravened Chapter I, Clauses 1.1, 1.2, 1.4 and 1.5 of the ASCI Code. This complaint was UPHELD