Ethics part ii 2014 by Dr CC Tan (drcctan@yahoo.com)
Mastering The PIP (Product Information Package) Claim Support
1. MASTERING THE PIP: CLAIM SUPPORT Presented by: Lambros Kromidas, Ph.D. V.P., Product Integrity Coty Inc.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12. What Types of Claims Need Substantiation and PIP Support? YES YES Performance Claims YES/NO NO Formula Claims NO NO [Emotive Claims] NO NO Puffery Claims NO NO Obvious Claims PIP Support Substantiation
I. One needs to know what a claim is, whether all claims need support, why claims need support, and whether that support needs to be included in the PIP before constructing the claims support section of the PIP.
As I will discuss, claims may or may not need substantiation.
Is every statement made on a product’s package a claim? No. Manufacturers are required to indicate the function of the product, unless it is clear from the presentation of the product. Usually one does not consider the indication of the function of the product as a claim. These are all labeling requirements.
Both of these promote the sale of the product.
Obvious: “Fire Red” LS. It is obvious that if one uses this LS their lips will be colored red. As for the 2 nd ex it is obvious that it is two products in one package or this product performs two functions. Puffery claims are flowery and sometimes non-sense claims that may deliver a subtle message to the consumer. A message that is one’s opinion more than anything else. Emotive Claims say nothing about the product, but play to the consumer’s emotions. As per COLIPA’s definition of a claim, such statements are not really claims and do not require substantiation.
Formula claims: “Contains Y, known to do Z.” Where Y is a cosmetic [active] ingredient and Z a cosmetic efficacy Such claims imply that the activity of Y is maintained in the cosmetic product Performance claims are the opposite of obvious claims. None of these claims would be obvious to the customer. Unless you say something the user may never know – may suspect – but never know. These are the best, the real claims that can make a blockbuster product.
If you are going to praise your product – if you are going to say your product does x, y, and z – it needs to be true. You can’t just make up things. If common sense does not dictate that advertising regulations do. To prove you are not making things up you need to have evidence in your files to support your statements. That evidence may be in the form of scientific literature or tests you conducted.
Obvious and puffery claims, do not need to be substantiated or supported in the PIP. Emotive claims. As per COLIPA’s definition of a claim, such statements are not really claims and do not require substantiation. Formula claims. If you are claiming that your product “contains X” and it does, and the INCI says so, you do not need to substantiate or support it in the PIP beyond showing it in the formula. One may also choose to put a short statement to that effect in the Claims Support section of the PIP. If you are claiming your product contains X known to do Y, then you need to show X in your INCI and support by: collecting evidence from the scientific literature scientific evidence gathered by the supplier Anecdotal/folklore evidence long use history for a certain purpose (e.g., Aloe has been used for ages to sooth, condition and moisturize the skin, so putting it in your product and claiming it is in there implies your product would also sooth, condition, and moisturize the skin.) any combination of the these This support should be in your master files but not necessarily in the Claims Support section of the PIP. [Whether you use enough to realistically expect anything out of the ingredient is another matter – a matter for Regulators and Legal to debate.] If you are going to claim that your product does Y because it contains X, then you crossed over to a performance claim. You need to show X on your INCI and conduct testing to substantiate that claim. Performance claims. Such claims are powerful marketing tools but are more difficult to substantiate technically but substantiate you must. These should definitely be supported in the PIP.
Hopefully, this is done way ahead of putting the PIP together. In the attempt to save label real estate, one may phrase claim statements in such brevity that they may loose their original meaning or unintentionally say something else – something not true of the product.
Sometimes in the development of a product concept, Marketing may run a large panel study. Out of such a study, certain claims may be realized. Likewise for Product Development. As they develop the product to meet Marketing’s concept, they may conduct tests to assess their success. Such studies may be used to substantiate the product’s claims. Also, out of such tests, new claims may be realized. However, the people most equipped to substantiate claims are the product testing people. The least equipped are the Legal/Regulatory people.
All claims, including those made in advertising need to be truthful, but if something is claimed only in advertising that does not appear on the package itself, the claim substantiation section in the PIP does not need to say anything about it.
![[object Object],[object Object]]()