Hygienic Research Institute Private Limited - Streax

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 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, “…. independent study conducted through …. a reputed Clinical Research Organization confirming that Streax Craft Repair Range Group showed upto 14 times less hair breakage, …... showed upto 2 times significantly better tensile strength, …. more smoothening and less lifting of cuticle was observed as compared to non-conditioning shampoo group which showed more cuticle lifting and breakage after 10 wash cycle”. As claim support data, the advertiser submitted the following documents – (1) copy of the advertisement, (2) copy of the product front and back label, (3) product approval license, (4) copy of test report. 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 shared with the complainant and the advertiser for making additional submissions. The complainant did not respond to the expert’s opinion. The advertiser had a telecon/meeting with the ASCI Secretariat and the technical expert to discuss their submissions. After the meeting with the expert, the advertiser submitted a copy of the presentation that was shared during the telecon/meeting. This document was sent to the technical expert for final opinion. The Consumer Complaints Council (CCC) viewed the product packaging, the amazon advertisement (https://www.amazon.in/Streax-Vita-Oils-Enriched-Vitamin-Macadamia/dp/B0DD7TZ3DS/ref=sr_1_6?crid=2D3UJ69F04PW9&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.etlSQ0sjnwl9kr8gWyDUQE-kbLZ5Df92OA2E6GCBXmV9J3SEmfJdx76Wb_6zVdDno_TLudik0RN9JMDBqub73DaDV5AQelIev-2D4t5VJU-XrADaLFZ9_29C4cRctgfvOhdzKGQgDa1wLfor9u6ZYYSoNQOQ9reJWQzd9Hp94lQyn5OrCz3hjBEMPr20SgXa0vKti6Y1BPm1c52xhaDPpqaYpMmAh2eOEqtskV4eR3vxOLFxdGteD3P9pSiP9Q0E_E2lGeACiB5hI7D-c1xffR_i0xBkSxlU-gTfGJuS1pVSA9Zrfs4QX_AsmbxHCdOeiTHAZjJffBO3ZxwLyd-mEw.kQSouHMiJkOtpuZY8_sa6MntDUo2mKKUg12yCVozVWg&dib_tag=se&keywords=streax+craft&nsdOptOutParam=true&qid=1737029837&sprefix=streax+craft%2Caps%2C250&sr=8-6), considered the complaint, the advertiser’s response along with the claim support data, and the expert’s final opinion presented at the meeting. The CCC observed that the advertiser has submitted a test report of a study conducted to evaluate and compare effect of Streax Craft-Repair Range (Shampoo + Mask + Serum) versus Non-conditioning shampoo on damaged hair swatches. The CCC further observed that the disclaimer in the advertisement states, “Based on a study (manual combing and instrumental test) conducted for Streax Craft Repair Range of shampoo+masque+serum vs non-conditioning shampoo, by external agency under controlled laboratory conditions”. Claim – “Damage reduction by Upto 14X less hair breakage” The CCC discussed that the test report submitted by the advertiser outlines the results of a study aimed at assessing the effectiveness of the Streax Craft Repair Range on damaged hair. The study was conducted in an in-vitro environment and specifically focused on evaluating hair breakage under different conditions, tracking the impact of the product over multiple washes. The results showed an improvement in hair strength and a reduction in breakage with the Streax Craft Repair Range after multiple washes, compared to a non-conditioning shampoo. Claim – “Upto 2X significantly better tensile strength” The CCC discussed that the test was conducted over two wash cycles, focusing on assessing the product's impact at different stages of use. The findings reveal that, after multiple washes, the Streax Craft Repair Range demonstrated upto twice better tensile strength compared to a non-conditioning shampoo. Claim – “Reduced cuticle lifting for frizz control and smoother hair” The CCC discussed that the test report highlights the effects of the Streax Craft Repair Range treatment at different time points. After using the product, the hair appears smoother with less cuticle lifting, indicating improved hair texture and reduced damage compared to the non-conditioning shampoo. This demonstrates a reduction in damage, smoother hair, and better frizz control with the use of the Streax Craft Repair Range. The CCC further discussed that the disclaimer in the advertisement clarifies that the claims made about the product are based on a study conducted on the entire product range. The advertisement emphasizes that the claimed benefits are observed when the products are used together as a complete system. It conveys that the results are achieved when the full range is used in combination, rather than from a single product. Based on this assessment, the CCC concluded that the product packaging and advertisement claims – “Damage reduction of upto 14X less hair breakage”, “Upto 2X significantly better tensile strength”, and the product packaging claim, “Reduced cuticle lifting for frizz control and smoother hair”, were substantiated. The said claims are not in contravention of Chapter I of the ASCI Code. This complaint was NOT UPHELD.