This article is more than 5 years old. Information may no longer be current.
Johnson & Johnson challenges claims in CIBA’s contact lens ad campaign
Click Here to Manage Email Alerts
NEW YORK — The National Advertising Division of the Council of Better Business Bureaus has determined that although CIBA Vision Corp can support certain advertising claims made as part of its “Power of One” advertising campaign, it recommended that CIBA modify or discontinue certain other claims made for CIBA Dailies and CIBA Air Optix Aqua contact lenses, according to a National Advertising Division press release.
The advertising at issue was challenged by Johnson & Johnson Vision Care Inc. (JJVC), who contended that the “Power of One” campaign relied on selective citation of data of reported differences in certain studies of patient compliance rates with the Manufacturer Recommended Replacement Frequency (MRRF) for daily, 2-week and monthly disposable contact lenses, the release said.
JJVC contended that CIBA used this selective citation to claim that compliance rates are dramatically higher for daily and monthly replacement lenses, which almost exclusively comprises CIBA’s product sales, compared to 2-week replacement lenses, for which JJVC produces the market-leading product, and linked this data to greater profits for the eye care professional, said the release.
Upon evaluation, the National Advertising Division (NAD) determined that the evidence submitted by CIBA was sufficient to reasonably support the claims in their ads regarding rates of patient compliance in relation to lens replacement frequency, despite JJVC’s criticisms; however, bar graph representations of the studies’ data featured in several of the advertisements misleadingly conveyed the magnitude of differences in compliance rates between daily, 1- to 2-week and monthly replacement lenses, and NAD recommended CIBA discontinue the use of such graphs in any comparative context, according to the release.
NAD also recommended CIBA modify its advertising to make clear that claims related to patients “stretching” the replacement interval for lenses are based on MRRF.
In response, CIBA distributed a statement saying that it “agrees to take the steps recommended by NAD to clarify and differentiate when and whether the patient compliance rates referred to are based on MRRF or adjusted MRRF,” according to the release.