False advertising for Pantene has upset People around the World

People from around the world have been upset by false advertising claims about Pantene Pro-V shampoo.

Last year, Proctor & Gamble was accused two times of falsely advertising its products in China. In the case of Pantene Pro-V, an advertising standards agency ordered the commercial be taken off the air.

Additionally, the Advertising Standards Authority in the United Kingdom took issue with advertising for Pantene Pro-V, based on scientific claims made in a specific advertisement.

The advertisement in question claimed that the shampoo made hair ten times more resilient than normal hair by replenishing amino acids. According to one report, the advertisement claimed that Pantene Pro-V could 'supplement amino acids to make hair stronger... for a lifetime.'

In defending itself, Proctor & Gamble said that the claims made in the advertisements were based on actual laboratory tests. It also denied using the words "for a lifetime" in its advertisements. It also said that its claims were based on scientific data.

This wasn't the first time Proctor & Gamble was in trouble for advertising in China. In April 2005, the company paid a $24,000 fine after an insurance agent in Nanchang complained that their $100 SKII skin cream did not make her skin look 12 years younger in 28 days as their advertisements promised.

She also claimed the cream caused itchiness and pain. Proctor & Gamble finally admitted that the "12 years younger" claim was not a complete representation of facts because it came from the best of its results.

In the United Kingdom, a watchdog group called the Advertising Standards Authority said that claims in Pantene Pro-V commercials were "misleading" and "unsubstantiated". It also said the claims made were not backed by science.

According to the Advertising Standards Authority, advertisements for Pantene Pro-V claimed the shampoo would make hair "up to ten times stronger" and would "put back what life takes out" of your hair. The organization said that because it was possible to take the claims literally, they should have been backed up by science. However, no evidence of the truth of the claims was given.

In a report written in May, 2005, the Advertising Standards Authority investigated complaints from viewers that Proctor & Gamble had used scientific words inappropriately. It also questioned whether or not viewers would be mislead by a contradiction between the commercial's voice-over, which stated "up to 10x stronger" and onscreen text, which claimed "10x stronger".

The Authority upheld all complaints, noting, "we believed there was a significant difference in meaning between a claim which implied a range and another claim which implied an exact amount." In the end, the Authority stated that the commercial "should not be shown again in its current form."

The Advertising Standards Authority is an independent body set up by the advertising industry. Its mandate is to ensure advertising codes are followed.

In the United States, final say over advertising claims belongs to the Federal Trade Commission. In most cases, claims made in advertisements are analyzed by competitors and consumer groups. If they find any troubling claims, those groups can file a complaint with the industry's self-regulating body.