Advertising claim: "America s most warranted The Commission recently advised a manufacturer who wished ,::nto…
71 F.T.C. 1725 · Mar. 8, 1967 · Digest No. 116
source volume section (71 F.T.C. 1725)
Text is machine-OCR of the printed volume and may contain errors. Advisory opinions are the Commission's views on proposed conduct, not binding orders.
No. 116. Advertising claim: "America s most warranted The Commission recently advised a manufacturer who wished ,::nto use the advertising claim "America s most warranted **
that it would be inappropriate and impracticable for it to give the desired advisory opinion.
Citing Rule 1.51 of its Rules of Practice, the Commission stated that the proposed claim was such that an informed decision thereon could be made only after extensive investigation, clinical study, testing, or collateral inquiry.
If the statement in question is true, the Commission added, then of course there is nothing in the statutes which it administers to prohibit its use. The question, however, is enormously complicated and to answer it would require both quantitative and qualitative determinations which could only be made after extensive investigation. While the Commission must of necessity investigate the use of extravagant claims, such investigation should not be initiated in support of an advisory opinion. Moreover, because of the nature of the proposed claim, Commission approval could be construed and exploited as Government endorsement. (File No. 673 7058, released Mar. 8, 1967.
1'0. 117. Misrepresentation of hand cream The Federal Trade Commission recently advised a marketer of hand cream that it would be improper and a violation of Commission administered law to represent, contrary to fact, that thc product had been "medically prescribed.
There are many precedents for the proposition that it is an unfair trade practice to misrepresent approval or endorsement of products by medical associations , doctors , dentists and related professional groups. (File No. 673 7067 , releasedlVar. 21 , 1967.