Companies are misleading consumers with claims that lack scientific backing. This is spreading misinformation and creating a hype epidemic. More consumer and legal regulation is needed.
“Is sodium caseinate good for her? Is fat-free milk better for her?”
“We replaced the sodium caseinate with milk.”
We’ve all heard the famous ad copy. In 2010, the parent company launched a new coffee mix with this tagline, and it paid off: within three months, the product reached $10 billion in sales and soon became the second largest in the industry. Consumers began to recognize sodium caseinate as a harmful chemical and began to favor the company’s products. Other competitors saw this and started doing similar marketing. This ad tapped into the stereotype of Korean people who think that anything that is “chemical” is bad for you. After the success of this marketing, the company is once again promoting its new product with the concept of “phosphate-free”. However, this substance, called sodium caseinate, is actually just casein, a type of protein extracted from milk, combined with sodium to make it more soluble in water. It is harmless to humans, and there is no daily intake limit. Phosphates are also just another type of mineral in the human body. While too much of it can be bad for you, such as not being able to absorb calcium, the phosphate you get from coffee is only 1.6% of your total intake.
This isn’t the first time we’ve seen this kind of misleading science. A few years ago, there was a controversy over MSG (Monosodium L-Glutamate). In 1968, a study was published in the United States that suggested that high MSG intake caused nausea and other symptoms, and it was referred to as Chinese restaurant syndrome (CRS; Kwok’s disease) because of the high use of MSG in Chinese restaurants. However, MSG requires 15 to 18 grams of MSG per kilogram of body weight to be directly harmful to humans, which is a large amount that is difficult to consume. Nevertheless, as the story of MSG’s harmful effects spread in Korea, a number of products claiming to be MSG-free appeared. Companies were quick to claim that MSG-free products were healthier.
The truth of these two examples is now known to a relatively large number of people through the internet and documentaries. However, similar “science” marketing continues. The superiority of natural vitamins over synthetic vitamins, or the benefits of enzyme foods, which have become a popular trend, are also unfounded. While many natural vitamin products emphasize that they are derived from “natural” sources, they are actually no different in composition and still require chemical processing to extract them, so it’s not so much whether they start out as natural or synthetic, but rather how well they separate the vitamins from other substances. Enzymes are also simply proteins with a large molecular weight that are broken down into amino acids and absorbed after ingestion, so it’s hard to see them as having any special effects. This kind of marketing doesn’t only exist for foods. Similar claims are made for cosmetics and other beauty products that claim to boost collagen, activate genes, or regenerate stem cells.
While many consumers are interested in health and beauty, they don’t have the scientific knowledge to discern whether claims are true or false, which is why many companies continue to make unsubstantiated claims to boost sales, even when they know that there is no scientific evidence to support the effectiveness of their products. These are ads that seem to be based on facts, but are really just relying on consumer emotions. In most fields today, a company must constantly compete with other companies. However, it’s hard to achieve a breakthrough product development that will set it apart from its competitors’ products, so it resorts to the relatively easy way out: marketing. It’s a form of hype, and worse, it’s a way to mislead people, and it’s also a way to hinder the development of technology and industry in the right direction.
Of course, the proliferation of misleading science marketing is primarily the fault of companies that are in a hurry to beat the competition. But are they the only ones to blame? Hype is regulated by law because it can undermine healthy competition between companies and violate consumers’ right to be safe and their right to know.
“The name, manufacturing method and quality of food, etc. shall not be misrepresented or oversold, the packaging shall not be oversold, and the labeling of food and food additives shall not be labeled or advertised in such a way as to cause confusion with drugs. The same applies to the nutritional value and ingredients of foods and food additives.” (Article 11 of the Korean Food Hygiene Act)
“Mislabeling and Hype Scope – 1.
1. whether or not to label or advertise that it has efficacy in treating diseases or that it may be confused with a drug.” (Article 13)
However, the practical effectiveness of the law is questionable because the penalties do not cover the above-mentioned advertisements, and the penalties for false and exaggerated advertisements are mostly limited to one-time measures such as corrective instructions. In fact, the number of cases of false and exaggerated advertisements for cosmetics increased 45 times from 2009 to 2012. Even if they are caught, the penalties are not severe, so they will continue to hype their products in order to increase their profits. We can’t leave it to the conscience of companies, so we need to impose legal sanctions, and the law is not doing its job.
Consumers are also partly to blame. No matter how misleading a company’s advertising is, if consumers were critical of it and not swayed by it, sales would not increase and hype would not spread as much as it has. Consumers shouldn’t blindly accept what they see in ads. However, it seems that in many cases, the use of scientific terminology that sounds “professional” leads people to believe that the claims are true. This may be a result of people’s ignorance. However, the truth is that there are many things that even a basic level of scientific knowledge can question the efficacy of, and in the age of the internet, it only takes a little time to find out. However, few consumers make the effort to find out the basis of these judgments for themselves, and instead rely on the images and information provided to them to make their purchasing decisions. Even when they know that the information may be wrong, they are often swayed by sensational and colorful advertising claims and purchase the product without making a factual judgment. Therefore, it is important to make a reasoned and careful decision before making a purchase, and this may be one way to prevent companies from using hype to misuse scientific knowledge.
The current state of “science” marketing is the result of a combination of companies pursuing immediate profits without developing technology, consumers uncritically accepting the content of advertisements, and governments not regulating properly. Therefore, all three must fulfill their responsibilities and roles in order to revitalize the market and develop the industry. Even if one misbehaves, if the other two fulfill their roles and responsibilities, the spread of excessive “science” marketing can be prevented. This normalization may seem like an immediate loss or inconvenience to some, but in the long run, it will benefit everyone.
