I saw a strange case out of the US - the Attorney General of the California Department of Justice entered into a settlement with a company for having marketed drinkable sunscreen.
The company, Dermatology Industry, Inc, represented that their product “UVO sun protectant,” a mixture of vitamins and dietary supplements, was a form of drinkable sun protection.In advertising materials, Dermatology claimed that its product, when ingested, would protect against the sun’s harmful rays. For example:
* 3-5 hours of sun protection from head to toe including your eyes,
* the first drinkable supplement to provide sun protection
* if you drink UVO you will have baseline protection that will help minimize the likelihood of burning even if you forget to use sunscreen.
Dermatology did not sound very repentant including in the settlement the following fighting words:
14. Dermatology Industry does not admit to the People’s allegations set forth herein and in the People’s Complaint in this matter, and does not admit that any violation has occurred. Defendant asserts that it genuinely believed that its UVO product was based on competent and reliable scientific evidence. Nevertheless, in the interest of avoiding the time and expense of litigation, Dermatology Industry is willing to settle and compromise its disputes and differences regarding the People’s allegations, as set forth herein.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment