Find us on...
On 12 February 2025, the ASA ruled against a cosmetic company making a range of ‘PPD-Free’ claims in a product containing PTD.
In their ruling, the ASA understood that the products themselves where indeed free from para-phenylenediamine (PPD), they contained para-toluenediamine (PTD). However, they determined that the company making these claims were not correctly representing the risk of cross-reactivity between people with an allergy to PPD and the risk of an allergic reaction to PTD. While the company had provided links to further information and recommended the need to carry out a 48-hr patch test, the ASA ruled that these were not sufficiently prominent to counteract the impression that there was very little risk to an allergic reaction in people with a PPD or other allergies. Due to the claims being related to a serious medical condition, the ASA ruled that it was not only misleading, but also irresponsible.
The ads must not continue to appear in the form complained about, and the company must ensure that their ads do not imply that their hair colourants are safe for individual with an allergy to PPD.
CTPA has issued a press release on this ASA ruling, and has more information on our FAQ’s: “If I am making a hair dye that doesn’t contain PPF, can I make the claim ‘PPD-free’?”
