Comparative advertising that claims Enfamil Lipil formula is better than Similac Advance for a child's mental and visual development has lead to a formal complaint filed with the Federal Trade Commission. The National Advertising Division (NAD) of the Council of Better Business Bureau filed the report after close to a year of inquiries and suggestions for changes to the ads.
NAD, the advertising industry's self-regulatory forum, first suggested Mead Johnson Nutritionals change its advertising for the Enfamil Lipil brand in April 2008. Over the course of three more inquiries, NAD says it asked Enfamil to clarify the ads comparing the two brands, pull them or remove Abbot Nutrition's Similac Advance name and comparison charts from advertising. NAD decided to turn the issue over to the FTC when Enfamil did not comply with the changes.
Read More About Enfamil's Advertising Dispute:
Mead Johnson reps say they stand behind the company's advertising. "NAD concluded that a few of Mead Johnson's claims might be misunderstood or may have exceeded the scope of the scientific support then available. Mead Johnson disagreed with those conclusions but respects the self-regulatory process and agreed to modify those claims."
NAD issued its own statement on the response in a press release. "NAD noted in its decision that the 'self-regulatory process cannot function properly when advertisers
state, on the one hand, that they respect the process and will comply with NADís decision, and then
do the opposite.'"