Nicocig claim their product has converted 400,000 smokers to E cigarette
AFRIK UPDATE
By Anna Hodgekiss
By Anna Hodgekiss
Advert for an
electronic cigarette brand which claimed it 'poses no health hazard' has been
banned.
The website for
Nicolites claimed the vapour inhaled and exhaled resembled smoke but was
'completely harmless'.
Watchdogs launched an
investigation after a complaint the website misleadingly claimed that the
product was not harmful and whether that could be substantiated.
Following an
investigation the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) found the ad breached
rules regarding "misleading advertising" and 'substantiation' and
ordered that it should not appear again in its current form.

The makers of
Nicolites, Birmingham-based Nicocigs, was told to ensure it did not claim
products were harmless in future in the absence of adequate evidence.
The website claimed:
'Although the vapour inhaled and exhaled when using Nicolite resembles smoke, it's
simply a completely harmless vapour.
'The vapour has no
odour and does not linger the way tobacco smoke does. So there's no danger of
passive smoking posed to those around "vapers," as e-cig users are
called. It's the tobacco that's harmful, not the nicotine, which is mildly
addictive but poses no health hazard.'
The makers claimed
the ingredients in their liquid, which was heated to create a vapour, were
tested in the UK and had been subject to a toxicology risk assessment to
confirm that all of the ingredients were safe and the vapour caused no harm.
They said a full
safety report had also been conducted on the safety of the inhaled aerosol and
it was concluded that 'it was very safe relative to cigarettes and also safe in
absolute terms on all measurements we have applied'.
Nicolites said there
was a long history of research conducted on nicotine and, while there was no
doubt that it was addictive, studies had shown that nicotine itself was not the
cause of smoking related illnesses.
'Although we did not
see any studies in their entirety, we noted one of the documents referred to a
trial related to vaporising propylene glycol and children but were concerned
about the small scale of the study, the fact it was not on the target audience
of the claims, which we presumed to be adults, as well as about whether the
ingredient tested reflected the make-up of the advertised product itself.
'It was also unclear
whether the inhalation method used reflected that users of the product would
experience.
'In addition, we
noted the toxicology risk assessment, which also did not take the form of a
controlled clinical trial, concluded that the e-cigarette was unlikely to pose
a risk to health over and above that of cigarettes.
'We considered,
however, the implication of the ad, via claims such as 'it's simply a
completely harmless vapour' and 'poses no health hazard' was that the product
would pose no risks to health at all.
'For the reasons
given, we considered the claims that the product was not harmful had not been
substantiated and we therefore concluded that the ad was misleading.'
He added: 'The ad
must not appear again in its current form. We told Nicolites to ensure they did
not claim products were harmless in future in the absence of adequate
evidence.'
Comments
Post a Comment