The Advertising Standards Council of India (ASCI) found that all 60 nutraceutical ads it finished reviewing between July and September violated its advertising code. However, ASCI is a self-regulatory body and cannot fine any of the 32 brands behind the ads. It can only recommend that brands modify or withdraw their ads.

“Substantiation should precede the promise, not follow a complaint,” ASCI said in its report, “A Pill for Thought.”

ASCI identified these ads through a sweep investigation, searching for them itself rather than waiting for complaints. None of the 31 advertisers that contested its objections could substantiate their claims. The remaining 29 modified or withdrew their ads without contesting the objections. One additional case is still under review.

The brands are mostly direct-to-consumer (D2C) companies, including Wellbeing Nutrition, Fast&Up, Chicnutrix, Veera Health and Muditam. Swiggy also had a Raksha Bandhan campaign flagged.

What were the brands selling?

ASCI’s list of reviewed cases shows four patterns:

  • Prescription drug names: Two products carried names resembling those of glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) drugs, a class of prescription medicines used for weight loss and diabetes that includes semaglutide. These were Fitty GLP-1 Daily and Bargad GLP-ONE. Five other ads promoted berberine supplements. ASCI said some supplements and gummies positioned themselves as safer alternatives to prescription therapies for weight management and Type 2 diabetes. They claimed to burn fat, curb cravings, boost metabolism and control blood sugar spikes after meals.
  • Weight loss on a deadline: Seven other ads promoted products described as “fat burner”, “daily burner” or “weight management” supplements. The ads promised results such as “Lose 6 kgs in 60 days” and “Your thigh fat will be gone in 12 weeks.”
  • Anti-ageing and skin: 15 ads promoted anti-ageing, collagen, glutathione and pigmentation products, with claims such as “Your skin, but 7 years younger.” One under-the-tongue spray claimed to offer “three times faster absorption” and reverse wrinkles. ASCI said glutathione ads showing darker skin becoming lighter risked “reinforcing the problematic preference for lighter skin.”
  • Detox: 10 of the 61 ads promoted products named after the lungs, liver or kidneys, or marketed as detox products. Some ads claimed to clear tar from smokers’ lungs, using images of lungs turning from black to pink.

Six advertisers accounted for 24 of the 61 ads. Avangii Labs had the highest number, with six ads for its Nutrispray anti-ageing and hair sprays.

Why couldn’t brands back up their claims?

The brands relied on research into individual ingredients, rather than evidence about their finished products. “Even where a key ingredient in a product is well researched for a particular benefit, this does not automatically establish that the finished formulation delivers the same benefit,” the report said. ASCI said significant health claims require evidence specific to the product and its dosage.

ASCI identified two other recurring problems:

  • Superiority without a benchmark: Ads used terms such as “faster”, “more effective” and “first” without specifying what the product was being compared against.
  • Promises ahead of proof: When ASCI challenged their claims, brands often chose to withdraw or modify their ads rather than provide supporting evidence.

Some claims went as far as promising to treat diseases. One product claimed to “reverse PCOD”, referring to polycystic ovarian disease. Others claimed to ease asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, high blood pressure and cholesterol.

Can ASCI penalise these brands?

No. ASCI is a non-profit company, not a statutory regulator, so it cannot fine advertisers. Courts have held that its recommendations are not binding on companies that are not its members, according to SCC Online.

Its code has legal force only for television advertisements. Under the Cable Television Networks Rules, 1994, television channels cannot carry ads that violate ASCI’s code. No equivalent rule applies to online advertisements.

For online ads, ASCI can only refer brands to regulators:

  • Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI): FSSAI regulates nutraceuticals, and its rules prohibit food products from claiming to prevent, treat or cure diseases. Under a 2016 agreement, ASCI reports advertisers that do not comply with its decisions to FSSAI, which can take action under the Food Safety and Standards Act.
  • Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA): ASCI can refer ads that violate its code to the CCPA under an agreement the two bodies announced in March 2024. The CCPA can order misleading ads to be withdrawn. Under Section 21 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, it can fine manufacturers and endorsers up to Rs 10 lakh, with the penalty rising to Rs 50 lakh for repeat violations. It can also prohibit endorsers from endorsing products for up to one year, or three years for repeat violations.

The report does not say whether ASCI referred any of these 60 cases to FSSAI or the CCPA, or whether any brand faced a penalty.

Did these ads run online?

The report does not specify where the ads ran. ASCI’s wider data, however, points to digital platforms. 94% of the violations ASCI identified in 2024-25 were in digital media, while 68% of the digital ads it flagged were sponsored social media posts, according to its annual complaints report.

Questions the report leaves open:

  • Did ASCI refer any of these brands to FSSAI or the CCPA, and did either act?
  • Where did these ads run, and how many were influencer posts?
  • Will regulators look at supplements that use the names of prescription drugs, such as GLP-1?

Also Read:

The post Ad watchdog flags 60 supplement ads making weight loss and younger skin claims without proof appeared first on MEDIANAMA.