New Decisions: Diet Products, Free Range Eggs and More

The following decisions have been published:

Product Comparison Was Not Misleading

The Optipharm television advertisement for Optislim says in part: “Optislim or Optifast – The names are similar, the ingredients are similar, so which one should you chose?”  The advertisement compares price and where the ingredients are sourced.

The Complainant said Optislim and Optifast are  not comparable, because Optislim contains wheat and is therefore not gluten-free like Optifast.

The Advertiser said both products are low calorie meal replacement shakes and are therefore comparable products.  The products were compared because they have a similar name and similar ingredients but there is price difference.  The Advertiser said Optislim is aimed at the average consumer and not intended to address dietary needs of specific groups.

The Complaints Board said the products featured in the advertisement are sufficiently alike to make the comparison between the two meaningful. The Complaints Board agreed that consumers who did have specific dietary restrictions are likely to be well versed in verifying ingredients at point of purchase and are therefore unlikely to be misled or deceived by the claims made in the advertisement. The Complaints Board said the comparative claim made in the advertisement were clear and consumers were unlikely to be misled. Accordingly, the complaint was Not Upheld.

Certification of Free Range Eggs Queried

Heinz Wattie’s website advertisement for Original Mayonnaise said in part “Making a mayonnaise with the finest ingredients, including free range eggs, unsurprisingly gives the greatest flavours.”

The Complainant said the use of the phrase “free range eggs” in the advertisement was misleading because the term “free range” can have a range of definitions and the certification should be defined.

The Advertiser said it is generally understood that the term “free range” refers to hens which have access to the outdoors. The Advertiser said the farms where they source their eggs meet the requirements of the Animal Welfare (Layer Hens) Code of Welfare 2012 and this code states “barns with access to outdoors are usually referred to as free range systems”, the minimum amount of space for free range hens is 1 hectare per 2,500 hens and no amount of time outdoors is specified.

The Complaints Board agreed the advertisement was not misleading because the phrase “free range eggs” in the advertisement meets the definition of “free range” in the Animal Welfare (Layer Hens) Code of Welfare 2012, which is the current industry standard. Accordingly, the Complaints Board ruled the complaint was Not Upheld.