Beauty Firm Censured Over Mobile Phone Radiation Facial Spray

A series of press adverts by the health and beauty firm, Clarins promoting a new facial spray, Expertise 3P which the company claimed would "protect" people from mobile phone radiation has been censured by the UK's advertising watchdog, the ASA after it received several complaints. The magazine and national press ad stated "If electromagnetic waves can penetrate walls, imagine what they can do to your skin. Today, electromagnetic waves generated by a host of modern day electronic devices join a list of well-known pollutants which can damage skin. For the first time, Clarins Research reveals the link between exposure to artificial electromagnetic waves and accelerated skin ageing."

In their response to the complaints, Clarins asserted that they had been studying invisible pollution in the skins environment for many years. They had looked at electromagnetic waves produced by different types of domestic communications equipment and their effects on the skin; that study had been long and complex, because they had needed to create an area which could isolate cells to such a degree that they would be exposed only to the selected waves and specific wavelengths they wanted to study. They asserted that cell cultures had been exposed, for varying periods of time in an isolated room, to a frequency of 900 MHz which, they argued, was the most commonly used frequency for communications transmissions. They said they had then measured different features of the life of those cells and noted the changes that could affect skin quality. They argued that the conclusions of their study showed an increased production of free radicals which led to accelerated skin ageing, a slow down in cellular renewal, an increase in stress indicators and a deterioration in the skins natural protective barrier.

Clarins asserted that the role of the product was not to block the waves but to provide skin cells with active ingredients that were proven to reinforce the skins self-defence capacity against the damages identified after exposure to electromagnetic waves.

In their rejection of the adverts, the regulator noted that some of the studies carried out by Clarins were based on exposure to radiation from a simulated mobile phone for six hours and other studies used a constant 24-hour exposure. Naturally, the regulator considered that neither of those time periods were representative of typical consumer experience.

The ASA considered, therefore that the ads made an undue appeal to readers fear of the harm that could be caused by man-made electromagnetic waves.

In concluding, the ASA told Clarins not to state that electromagnetic waves generated by modern-day devices or domestic communications equipment could damage or age skin or to imply anti-ageing and pro-health efficacy claims for Expertise 3P unless they held robust scientific evidence to support that. They also told Clarins not to make an undue appeal to consumers fear of the harm that could be caused by man-made electromagnetic waves.

Posted to the site on 16th August 2007