Clause 14 Information, Claims and Comparisons

Clauses 6 and 18 may also be relevant.

The Code does not preclude the use of other companies’ brand names when making comparisons.

Comparisons with other products are usually made to show an advantage of the advertised product over its comparator. Provided that such critical references to another company’s products are accurate, balanced, fair etc and can be substantiated, they are acceptable under the Code.

The references referred to are those to published material, including the use of quotations, tables, graphs and artwork.

Superlatives are grammatical expressions which denote the highest quality or degree, such as best, strongest, widest etc. A claim that a product was ‘the best’ treatment for a particular condition, for example, could not be substantiated as there are too many variables to enable such a sweeping claim to be proven. The use of a superlative is acceptable only if it can be substantiated as a simple statement of fact which can be very clearly demonstrated, such as that a particular medicine is the most widely prescribed in the UK for a certain condition, provided that this is not presented in a way which misleads as to its significance.

In certain circumstances, ‘the’ can imply a special merit, quality or property for a medicine which is unacceptable under this clause if it cannot be substantiated. For example, a claim that a product is ‘The analgesic’ implies that it is, in effect, the best and might not be acceptable.

Similarly, care needs to be taken with the use of ‘unique’. Although ‘unique’ may sometimes be used to describe some clearly defined special feature of a medicine, often it may simply imply a general superiority. In such instances, it is not possible to substantiate the claim as the claim itself is so ill defined.

The benefit/risk profile of a medicine must be presented in such a way as to comply with the Code. Particular attention should also be paid to Clauses 6.1 and 6.4.