Pink Sheet is part of the Business Intelligence Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them. Informa PLC’s registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use. For high-quality copies or electronic reprints for distribution to colleagues or customers, please call +44 (0) 20 3377 3183

Printed By

UsernamePublicRestriction
UsernamePublicRestriction

Vicks 44 claims

This article was originally published in The Tan Sheet

Executive Summary

National Advertising Division of the Council of Better Business Bureaus announces Dec. 9 that Procter & Gamble did not respond to an inquiry initiated by NAD on Nov. 14 regarding advertising claims for Vicks 44 within the allotted 15 business days. American Home Products brought the Vicks ads to NAD's attention, alleging that commercials for Vicks 44 Maximum Strength Cough Syrup (now renamed Vicks 44 Dry Hacking Cough Syrup) erroneously implied overall superior efficacy. P&G said it would respond to the challenge within a second 15-day period, NAD said
Advertisement

Topics

Advertisement
UsernamePublicRestriction

Register

PS083539

Ask The Analyst

Please Note: You can also Click below Link for Ask the Analyst
Ask The Analyst

Your question has been successfully sent to the email address below and we will get back as soon as possible. my@email.address.

All fields are required.

Please make sure all fields are completed.

Please make sure you have filled out all fields

Please make sure you have filled out all fields

Please enter a valid e-mail address

Please enter a valid Phone Number

Ask your question to our analysts

Cancel