NAD Refers Advertising From Viss Beauty to FTC for Review

New York, New York – April 5, 2011– The National Advertising Division of the Council of Better Business Bureaus has referred advertising claims made by VISS Beauty Inc., to the Federal Trade Commission and Food and Drug Administration for further review, following the company’s refusal to participate in an NAD review.

NAD, the advertising industry’s self-regulatory forum, requested substantiation for claims made in Internet advertising and other national media for the VISS Intense Pulsed Light Hair Removal Device. The claims, challenged by TRIA Beauty, Inc., included the following:

  •  “Permanent Hair Reduction.  The pulse of light emitted by VISS IPL is absorbed by pigment in the hair shaft beneath the skin surface; this disables the hair follicle activity, preventing the hair from growing back.”
  •  “Scientifically-proven permanent hair reduction.”
  • “VISS IPL has been shown effective for both men and women.”
  •  “Intense Pulsed Light (IPL) devices, though technically not laser, emit light of all visible wavelengths (like a photo flash) while laser emits a single beam of light at a specific wavelength (like a laser pointer).  Although laser and light-based hair removal methods are commonly referred to collectively as ‘laser hair removal’, one of the advantages of IPL is that the different wavelengths penetrate the skin to different depths, therefore using IPL is like using a group of lasers in a single treatment.  Also, IPL treatment heads are up to 6 times larger than the small spot produced by laser devices and therefore treatments are much quicker.”
  • “Do your research, IPL is far better than laser – more effective, and safer on your skin.” 
  •  “VISS IPL has been developed in conjunction with leading dermatologists, and fulfils all the safety regulations for home-use devices.”

The company acknowledged receipt of NAD’s inquiry, but declined to submit a substantive written response.

Pursuant to NAD procedures, the advertising has been referred to the FTC and FDA for further review.