HBW Insight is part of Pharma Intelligence UK Limited

This site is operated by Pharma Intelligence UK Limited, a company registered in England and Wales with company number 13787459 whose registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. The Pharma Intelligence group is owned by Caerus Topco S.à r.l. and all copyright resides with the group.

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use. For high-quality copies or electronic reprints for distribution to colleagues or customers, please call +44 (0) 20 3377 3183

Printed By


FTC Finalizes ‘All-Natural’ Personal-Care Settlements, Offers A Word On ‘Natural’

This article was originally published in The Rose Sheet

Executive Summary

The Federal Trade Commission announces unanimous approval of final consent orders requiring four personal-care companies to make only properly substantiated “all-natural” and “100% natural” product claims from this point forward. In response to a submitted comment, FTC offers perspective on plain “natural” claims based on its understanding of how consumers interpret the term.

You may also be interested in...

Plaintiffs’ Bar Emboldened As Long As This ‘Amorphous Term’ Persists In Personal-Care Marketing

Beauty and personal-care brands and retailers face an emboldened plaintiffs’ bar challenging “clean” product claims, and that momentum could pick up under MoCRA. But industry is getting “a little bit more aggressive in pushing back,” says Duane Morris attorney Kelly Bonner.

Clean Beauty, The New ‘Natural,’ Carries Same Litigation Risk – Attorneys

Beauty and personal-care companies using ‘clean’ labeling and advertising should clearly define the term and ensure consistency across marketing messages, attorneys said at the BBB National Program Inc.’s 18 July webinar, ‘Getting Clean Beauty Advertising Right.’

Colgate’s Tom’s Of Maine Back In Federal Court Over ‘Natural’ Claims

Tom's natural claims on toothpastes and deodorants are false and misleading, a plaintiff alleges in a proposed class action filed in Massachusetts federal court. Similar to previous complaints against Colgate/Tom’s, the plaintiff’s case is premised on the contention that “natural,” as opposed to “100% natural,” means no synthetic ingredients.

Related Content


Latest Headlines
See All



Ask The Analyst

Ask the Analyst is free for subscribers.  Submit your question and one of our analysts will be in touch.

Your question has been successfully sent to the email address below and we will get back as soon as possible. my@email.address.

All fields are required.

Please make sure all fields are completed.

Please make sure you have filled out all fields

Please make sure you have filled out all fields

Please enter a valid e-mail address

Please enter a valid Phone Number

Ask your question to our analysts