MacuHealth Asserts ‘Rigorous Process’ In Research Supporting Claims, But No Bill Of Health From NAD
SBLA Beauty Doesn’t Answer NAD Request For Eye Lift Claims Support
“MacuHealth believes challenged claims are thoroughly supported by the multitude of peer reviewed, published scientific studies” but NAD review on Vision Elements challenge finds firm’s research doesn’t support its claims.
You may also be interested in...
Michigan firm likely remembered burden for substantiating health as well as structure/function claims under FDA regulations for supplements after NAD reviewed its ad materials presented online, in videos and in news releases submitted by Vision Elements.
A study finds claims for ocular supplements cited or relied on AREDS findings even when the products did not match the formulas assessed in the research by NIH’s National Eye Institute. The products emphasize AREDS but offer little information to consumers, they say.
PDC Brands declines to provide support for nine challenged claims for Dr. Teal’s line of balms, lotions, oils, soaps, sprays and other topicals. It continues using those after halting use of 25 other similar claims challenged by P&G, marketer of melatonin-containing ZzzQuil.