The ASA upheld both issues against a paid Instagram ad for a Dopamine Patch on 2 September. The rules it cited are worth reading closely, and so is the one it did not.
One shelf carries herbal products with a genuine MHRA registration number. The next carries the same plants sold as food. Reviewed on what a traditional herbal registration establishes, and what it conspicuously does not.
A position paper published on 18 August places microbiome-based medicines inside the medicines framework and puts food supplements and non-therapeutic probiotics expressly out of scope.
The spray format sells delivery rather than dose. An Advertising Standards Authority ruling in June measured that pitch against the evidence filed for it, and the result reframes the comparison.
A five-product British range named after a class of prescription medicine. Assessed on what the panels publish, what the claims framework permits, and where the collection's own name sits.
An open Food Standards Agency consultation on one traditional food is a rare chance to watch the machinery that decides which ingredients may lawfully be sold here at all.
Two products stating the same magnesium content can be quite different purchases. Reviewed on elemental content, salt form, and the authorised claims that actually apply.
Most of this shelf exists without any public-health body suggesting anyone needs it. Vitamin D is the exception, and the advice is more specific than the marketing around it.
Supermarket and pharmacy own-label multivitamins cost a fraction of the branded shelf. Reviewed on nutrient reference values, permitted claims, and what the premium actually buys.
The list of things a supplement label may lawfully say is public, finite and specific. A good deal of front-of-pack copy is written to gesture past it.
