Business ProfileforStudio Time Out

On December 13, 2019 BBB contacted this business regarding advertising claims made on their website. Despite additional contacts, the business did not provide a response to BBB. Specifically, BBB requested documentation supporting the following claims: the website includes testimonials without support to show the statements are genuine, show results most all consumers may achieve and reflect the current opinions of the endorsers. The website claims a time-in-business of 1999. However, according to records at Minnesota Sec. of State, the business began in 2008. The site claims testing and treatments for heavy metal and trace minerals using medical devices but did not include information support the claims for effectiveness and general impact on chronic illnesses. 

BBB urges consumers to consult with their primary care physician before beginning a course of treatment. 

The BBB Code of Advertising, available at: https://www.bbb.org/code-of-advertising; states:  1. Basic Principles of the Code  1.1 The primary responsibility for truthful and non-deceptive advertising rests with the advertiser. Advertisers should be prepared to substantiate any objective claims or offers made before publication or broadcast. Upon request, they should present such substantiation promptly to the advertising medium or BBB.  1.2 Advertisements which are untrue, misleading, deceptive, fraudulent, falsely disparaging of competitors, or insincere offers to sell, shall not be used. 1.3 An advertisement as a whole may be misleading by implication, although every sentence separately considered may be literally true. 1.4 Misrepresentation may result not only from direct statements, but by omitting or obscuring a material fact.

28. Objective Superlative Claims  Superlative statements in advertisements about the tangible qualities and performance values of a product or service are objective claims for which the advertiser must possess substantiation as they can be based upon accepted standards or tests. As statements of fact, such claims, like “#1 in new car sales in the city,” can be proved or disproved.

30. Testimonials and Endorsements  30.1 In general, advertising which uses testimonials or endorsements is likely to mislead or confuse if: 30.1.1 It is not genuine and does not actually represent the current opinion of the endorser; 30.1.2 The actual wording of the testimonial or endorsement has been altered in such a way as to change its overall meaning and impact; 30.1.3 It contains representations or statements which would be misleading if made directly by the advertiser; 30.1.4 While literally true, it creates deceptive implications; 30.1.5 The endorser has not been a bona fide user of the endorsed product or service at the time when the endorsement was given, where the advertiser represents that the endorser uses the product or service; 30.1.6 It is not clearly stated that the endorser, associated with some well-known and highly-regarded institution, is speaking only in a personal capacity, and not on behalf of such an institution, if such be the fact; 30.1.7 The advertising makes broad claims as to the endorsements or approval by indefinitely large or vague groups, for example, “the homeowners of America,” “the doctors of America;” 30.1.8 The endorser has a financial interest in the company whose product or service is endorsed and this is not made known in the advertisement; 30.1.9 An expert endorser does not possess the qualifications that give the endorser the expertise represented in the advertisement; 30.1.10 The advertiser represents, directly or by implication, that the endorser is an “actual consumer” when such is not the case and the advertisement fails to clearly and conspicuously disclose that fact; 30.1.11 A consumer’s experience represented in an advertisement is not the typical experience of those using the product or service, unless the advertisement clearly and conspicuously discloses what the expected results will be; 30.1.12 Endorsements placed by advertisers in online blogs or on other third-party websites do not clearly and conspicuously disclose the connection to the advertiser and comply with each of the provisions in this Code; and 30.1.13 Advertisers compensate consumers for leaving feedback on third-party online blogs or websites but fail to ensure that consumers disclose such facts on those blogs or websites.   In the U.S., advertisers should consult the Federal Trade Commission Guides on Testimonials and Endorsements for detailed guidance. In Canada, advertisers should review the Competition Bureau’s publication on Untrue, Misleading or Unauthorized Use of Tests and Testimonials for specific guidance. 

34. Claimed Results  Claims relating to performance, energy savings, safety, efficacy or results for a product or service should be based on recent and competent testing or other objective data. 

36. Environmental Benefit Claims  36.1 General Principles 36.1.1 Advertisers should not make broad, unqualified general environmental benefit claims like “green” or “eco-friendly.” 36.1.2 Advertisers must qualify general claims with specific environmental benefits. 36.1.3 Advertisers must possess competent and reliable evidence (often scientific evidence) to support all environmental benefit claims. Qualifications for any claim must be clear, conspicuous and understandable. 36.1.4 When an advertiser qualifies a general claim with a specific benefit, the benefit should be significant. Advertisers must not highlight small or unimportant benefits. 36.1.5 Unless clear from the context, any environmental claim must specify clearly and conspicuously whether the claim applies to the product, the product’s packaging, a service or just to a portion of the product, package or service.