Comments on: ASA: Dore advert is “misleading” and breaches rules on “truthfullness” and “substantiation”

By: Zeno

Zeno — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 22:54:39 +0000

Pazot

The ASA have a very good record of requiring robust, peer reviewed, randomised, controlled, blinded trials on humans as evidence for claims made by advertisers and rejecting anything that doesn’t meet that high standard.

See my blog for details of ASA adjudications against chiropractors.

By: pazot

pazot — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 13:46:02 +0000

Excellent result. I’m impressed by the ASA’s willingness to properly assess Dore’s claims.

By: uberVU - social comments

uberVU - social comments — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 23:45:56 +0000

Social comments and analytics for this post…

This post was mentioned on Twitter by brainduck: http://ow.ly/N1pA Sun on ASA ruling: Dore ‘research’ is pants, ads misleading http://ow.ly/N1sQ well done @HolfordWatch http://ow.ly/N1rj...

By: Dore media and blog coverage « Holford Watch: Patrick Holford, nutritionism and bad science

Thu, 17 Dec 2009 22:52:30 +0000

[...] Off-Topic ASA: Dore advert is “misleading” and breaches rules on “truthfullness” and&n… [...]

By: Dore research ‘is rubbish’, but I still can’t tell you so « Brainduck’s Weblog

Thu, 17 Dec 2009 16:39:51 +0000

[...] read the whole thing, it’s a few paragraphs of clear demolition of Dore’s arguments. Holfordwatch, who made the original complaint, have a discussion of the ruling, and Podblack has covered the [...]

By: zeno

zeno — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 14:22:07 +0000

An excellent adjudication and a win for common sense and for protecting the public!

There really can be no excuse for people to make claims that they just do not have good evidence for. And it is perfectly clear to all exactly what the ASA considers good evidence.