Board  ASA Complaints

16 August 2016

Fluoride Free NZ

Dear Mary

Re: Fluoride Free NZ Television – Complaint 16/297

I enclose a copy of correspondence received from COMPLAINANT 1 concerning the above advertisement.

The relevant section in the Advertising Codes of Practice appears to be: Code of Ethics – Basic Principle 4, Rule 11, Rule 2, Rule 6;

I would appreciate your comments in regard this complaint so that we may place the matter before the Complaints Board for consideration. May I please have your written response on 24 August 2016 and would you advise if your response is on behalf of any other parties.

Please note: If you choose to alter or remove your advertisement in response to this complaint, send a copy of the altered advertisement to the ASA or advise us of its removal before the date given for your response. The Chairman may consider the complaint settled if she is satisfied the action taken resolves the issue at the centre of the complaint.

We ask that you do not make any direct contact with the primary Complainant or any duplicate Complainants. Any matters you wish to address to the Complainants should be directed to this office in the first instance.

I have also written to Commercial Approvals Bureau Yours sincerely

Case Manager 

E
Po Box 10-675, Wellington 6143

www.asa.co.nz

TV3

 

2016-08-05

At some point between 6pm and 7:30pm

On the 5th of August 2016, an advertisement classifying under advocacy advertising by the Fluoride Free NZ organization was aired on TV3, during an advertisement break in the 6pm News. I had also seen this advertisement aired at a similar time, on a previous day in the week. There is a similar advert online from the same company, which can be found on youtube, which I will reference for some points of interest (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e6txMDoibsA&feature=youtu.be).

 

I feel that the most appropriate code which has been broken, is the Advertising Code of Ethics, as the advert is advocating stopping water fluoridation. Within this code, I believe the advertisement breaks Rule 2, Truthful Representation, when it emphasizes words such as: “Acid”; “Fluoride”; “Waste Product”; several Elements of the Periodic Table, with no mention as to their effects – which is especially relevant because they have negative connotations associated with them for many people, simply acknowledging that the product used to add fluoride to water can contain them; “Banned”; “Toxic Chemical”, which is affirmed further in displaying a worker in Personal Protective Equipment, but neglects to notice that it is commonly required equipment in many professional vocations.

 

In emphasizing these words, the advertisement played on fear, which would be in violation of Rule 6, Fear, of this Advertising Code, as none of the aforementioned words have positive connotations.

 

The advertisement also does not mention anything about the potential dangers of fluoride, the very chemical they are advocating removal of from water. This is particularly important in relation to Rule 2, Truthful Representation, as they do not give the information perhaps the most imp01iant about water fluoridation, which is when fluoride is present in water in New Zealand, there is no more than 1ppm of fluoride present. This equates to requiring drinking over 5,000 glasses of water at one time before approaching toxic levels of fluoride (http://www.health.govt.nz/our-work/preventative-health-wellness/fluoridation/water­ fluoridation/fluoride-and-safety, Ministry of Health NZ, “Fluoride and Safety”, accessed 8/8/16).

 

While the chemical which is used to add fluoride to water, Hexafluorosilicic acid is indeed a toxic chemical and waste product, as is mentioned in the advertisement, the processes which are undergone in treatment plants are rigorous in ensuring any additional compounds added to fluoridated water are not present. The Hexafluorosilicic acid which is used in this process must confonn to the standards laid out in this document (https://www.watemz.org.nz/Folder?Action=View%20File&Folder id=3 l 5&File=140604 nzwwa f gpg revision final.pd!:) also, which is in place to ensure there is an approved composition of the chemical to be used. A process by which the chemical is made can be found here as well (http://nzic.org.nz/ChemProcesses/production/1C.pdj:) which notes the purpose of water fluoridation as well.

 

Water fluoridation within regulations is also approved by the Ministry of Health NZ, given the results from a review published by the Royal Society of New Zealand in August 2014, which was commissioned by the New Zealand Prime Minister’s Chief Science Advisor at

 

the time, at the request of several Councils in New Zealand, where the review can be found here: http://www.royalsociety.org.nz/2014/08/22/review-finds-commnnity-water­ fluoridation-safe-and-effective/.

Thank you,

COMPLAINANT 1

 

 

 

From: COMPLAINANT 2 

Sent: Saturday, August 6, 2016 9:30 PM

To: ASA

Cc: Advertising Standards Authority

Subject: Complaint submission from S Willoughby-Martin ninja-forms-submission.csv

Attachments:

 

Complaint 

Advertiser:  fluoridefree.org.nz Product/Service: Health and Beauty Ad Type:          Television TV3

Ad Details:  Mrs Doubtfire 2016-08-06 21:00

 

Complaint Details

I am wanting to make a complaint against the Fluoride TV add that aired during the Mrs Doubtfire movie on TV3.

I feel this ad is giving incorrect information (that the chemicals distributed into water are diluted to such a low level they cause no health risk but instead create a health benefit) and that the ad is playing on the fear of those un-informed of the issue, and providing only the bad (incorrect) informattion without any mention of the benefit.

I am surprised this advertisement ever made it past the Standards committee and I hope this will be investigated quickly. Thank you for your time.

Link to video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e6txMDojbsA

 

Complainant Details

Name: COMPLAINANT 2

Waiver, read and understood: checked Not a competitor: checked

Copy of the ASA Codes of Practice booklet required: unchecked

 

From: COMPLAINANT 3 r

Sent: Saturday, August 6, 2016 12:33

To: ASA

Cc:

Subject: Advertising Standards Authority Complaint submission from COMPLAINANT 3

Attachments: 2016-08-06-screenshot_2016-08-06-12-21-12.png; ninja-forms-submission.csv

 

Complaint

Advertiser:  Flouride Free NZ Product/Service: Advocacy

Ad Type:    Television 3

Ad Details: 2016-08-04 Evening

 

Complaint Details:

Fluoridation of our water supply is an important public health measure, and i am concerned that this advertisement contains misleading information. The advertisement talks of flouride being a waste product and shows that it requires full hazmat gear to move, suggesting that it is therefore harmful to be added to the water supply. However, thousands of studies have found flouride, when added to drinking water at the recommended amount, to be a safe and effective way of managing tooth decay. While it is dangerous in high quantities, other additives to drinking water, such as chlorine would be just as, or more dangerous in bulk quantities. This advertisement is misleading and fear mongering. The advertiser’s website is flouridefree.organization.nz and contains examples of the two ads they have run this year on TV3.

 

Confirmations

Waiver, read and understood: checked Not a competitor: checked

Copy of the ASA Codes of Practice booklet required: unchecked

 

Submitted files (if any)

 

From: COMPLAINANT 4

Sent: Saturday, August 6, 2016 9:16 PM

To: ASA

Cc:

Subject: Advertising Standards Authority Complaint submission from COMPLAINANT 4

Attachments:

 

Complaint

Advertiser: Flurodie free NZ Product/Service: Other

Ad Type:   Television TV3

Ad Details: During Mrs Doubtfire 2016-08-06 9pm

 

Complaint Details:

Advertising against fluoride in water using “facts” that have been proven to be incorrect as reinforced via peer reviewed scientific information. There is no way that you’d allow anti vaccine advertisements to be screened, so why spread misinformation and scaremonger the population.

 

Complainant Details

Name: COMPLAINANT 4

 

Confirmations

Waiver, read and understood: checked Not a competitor: checked

Copy of the ASA Codes of Practice booklet required: unchecked

 

Submitted files (if any)

 

From: COMPLAINANT 5 

Sent: Monday, August 8, 2016 10:35 AM

To: ASA

Cc:

Subject: Advertising Standards Authority Complaint submission from A Campbell ninja-forms-submission.csv

Attachments:

 

Complaint

Advertiser:  Flouride Free NZ Product/Service: Advocacy

Ad Type:    Television TV3

Ad Details: 2016-08-06 9.00PM

 

Complaint Details:

This fluoride free New Zealand commercial was a blatant political commercial whilst not mentioning it was a fluoride commercial until the very end. Furthermore the information contained within was extremely factually inaccurate and potentially hugely damaging to the reputation and functioning of the New Zealand healthcare sector. This kind of highly biased political agenda should not be screened during a children’s movie if at all and certainly not without a disclaimer before the commercial displaying the agenda of the add.

 

Confirmations

Waiver, read and understood: checked Not a competitor: checked

Copy of the ASA Codes of Practice booklet required: unchecked

 

Submitted files (if any)

fluoridefree.org.nz                          III