I would like to correct the factual inaccuracies in your story regarding the Advertising Standards Authority’s adjudication on Persil Aloe Vera (MW February 6).
The fact is: the complaint was not upheld. The ASA agreed that Persil Aloe Vera is kinder to skin than the previous formation and it found that Persil Aloe Vera advertising was not misleading in the claims made.
Therefore, I am confused by your headline, which proclaimed – in contradiction to the ruling – Unilever had been “forced to admit aloe vera variant is of no real benefit to skin”.
Persil Aloe Vera is the product of a five-year research programme. Our work included applying dermatological techniques never before used in the laundry sector. Our research methods were supported by the British Skin Foundation and other experts because they recognised genuine advances had been made. Your headline and the introduction do not reflect that conclusion.
The fact is that the ASA found that Persil Aloe Vera is kinder to skin. That is why it felt that our advertising was not misleading.
Corporate & consumer affairs director
The story states explicitly that the complaint, by trading standards officers, was not upheld. It also states that Lever FabergÃ© itself conceded the “overall kindness” of the product was more important for skincare than the unique addition of aloe vera.