ASA Adjudication on Anglian Water Services Ltd

Ad

A promotional feature in a magazine, which aimed to reassure mothers-to-be about the quality of tap water, was headlined “Tapping into water”. A sub-heading stated “Reassuring mothers-to-be when they turn on their taps. Some useful advice from anglianwater”. Text below was in the form of an article. One section was headed “Why you can feel confident about the safety of your drinking water”, and text stated, “Every step of the drinking water process, from the source through to your tap, is checked continuously”. Another section entitled “Your drinking water” stated “Some natural mineral waters can contain high levels of certain substances. If you drink bottled water it is essential that you check the water quality analysis on the label, particularly for levels of sodium, fluoride and sulphate. If you have any concerns contact your GP for advice”. Another section entitled “Tap water and babies’ feeds” stated “It is perfectly safe to use tap water to make babies [sic] feeds. All water used to make babies [sic] feeds should be boiled before adding to the feed”.

Issue

The complainant challenged whether the claims:

1. "Every step of the drinking water process, from the source through to your tap, is checked continuously" was misleading, because she believed that very few tests were made at tap level and that most households were never tested;

2. "If you drink bottled water it is essential that you check the water quality analysis on the label, particularly for levels of sodium, fluoride and sulphate. If you have any concerns contact your GP for advice" was misleading and could cause undue fear because it implied that bottled water posed health threats; and

3. "It is perfectly safe to use tap water to make babies [sic] feeds" was misleading, because she believed some babies would be exposed to lead-contaminated water.

CAP Code (Edition 11)

Response

1. Anglian Water Services Ltd (Anglian) confirmed the ad was produced jointly with the Drinking Water Inspectorate (DWI), as a result of work with the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, who had approached the DWI to work with one of the UK Water Companies on the article. The purpose was to help inform pregnant women and families with young children of some key facts regarding drinking water and where they could find additional information. They said the Water Supply Regulations required water companies to monitor drinking water supplies against a series of numerical standards. Every year samples were collected from raw water sources before any treatment was undertaken and then a number of tests on treated water were undertaken, as prescribed in the relevant regulations. They said those regulations included water treatment works and storage points operated by the water company, along with randomly selected customer taps. They said that in 2009 Anglian Water carried out over 300,000 tests on drinking water supplies and over 30% of those tests were carried out on samples collected directly from customer taps, fulfilling all regulatory requirements. They said additional monitoring and sampling ensured that there was a continual check through every step of the drinking water process, from source to tap. They said the regulations for tests on customer taps required a representative number of addresses to be randomly selected for samples; in 2009 over 104,000 tests were carried out on customers' taps in their region, which monitored a wide range of parameters.

2. Anglian said there were regulatory requirements for bottled water labels to contain water quality information and, where applicable, warnings about the fluoride content and the sodium levels. They said the advice given by the Food Standards Agency (FSA) and the Health Protection Agency (HPA) was to use tap water. However, they felt it was important to make readers aware that if bottled water was used, the water quality information on the label needed to be checked. If consumers were unsure about any information on the label, they should seek medical advice. They said that the World Health Organisation (WHO) guidelines stated that the intake of sodium from drinking water might be of greater significance in those who required a sodium-restricted diet and bottle-fed infants and the FSA also held that view. They said natural fluoride levels could vary significantly and there were different regulatory requirements for natural mineral water compared to spring or bottled drinking water, and gave examples of some wording and warnings that should feature on bottle water labels, which they felt it was important for the reader to check.

3. Anglian said the information regarding the risks lead posed for both mothers-to-be and children under the age of 6 years-old was clearly stated in the articles facts on drinking water and pointed out that it appeared just above the claim "It is perfectly safe to use tap water to make babies [sic] feeds". They said the article set out to raise awareness and described the type of houses in which lead pipes might be found (those built before 1970 when lead was banned from use in domestic drinking water systems) and explained how readers could check whether they had any lead plumbing. They said the ad also emphasised that readers who believed they had lead pipes should contact their water company for advice and to arrange for their water to be tested. They said the article also stated that Anglian offered this service to their customers free of charge. Over 12,000 tests for lead were carried out at customers' taps in 2009 either as part of their monitoring or at customers request. They also provided details of their website which had additional information on drinking water quality by postcode and contained a lead fact sheet. The article also advised that customers "should run off any water which had stood in pipe work for a period of time (such as overnight)" and listed the Water UK website which independently gave advice on the use of tap water for babies. They said they also checked the FSA and HPA websites prior to publication to ensure the article was in line with their advice.

Assessment

1. Not upheld

The ASA understood that there were regulations in place to ensure that tap water supplies were safe for users. We noted that Anglians testing processes began with untreated raw water sources and continued through to tests on household taps. On that basis, we considered that Anglians testing process covered every step of the drinking water process. We also noted that they selected a representative proportion of customers taps for those tests and in 2009 over 104,000 (30% of tests) were carried out on customers' taps.

Because we considered that Anglian carried out tests throughout the drinking water process, including a significant number of tests at tap level, and because we were satisfied that they had followed the relevant regulations to ensure that tap water was safe, we concluded the ad was not misleading on this point.

On that point, we investigated the ad under CAP Code clauses 3.1 (Substantiation), 7.1 (Truthfulness), 9.1 (Fear and distress), 10.1 (Safety) and 19.1 (Other comparisons), but did not find it in breach.

2. Not upheld

We sought advice from the FSA. We understood that there were three legal categories of bottled water: natural mineral water, spring water and bottled drinking water, but the ad did not specifically distinguish between the different types of bottled water. We understood that spring water and bottled drinking water were required to meet the same standards as tap water. Because the limits set were the same as tap water, we did not consider that it was essential for pregnant women to check the levels of sodium, fluoride and sulphate on spring water or bottled drinking water labels. We understood that there was also no legal requirement to include an analytical composition on the label of spring waters and bottled drinking waters.

We understood, however, that natural mineral water could have higher levels of certain minerals and was required to include an analytical composition on the label that included the fluoride level if over 1.5mg/l. In any case, the level of fluoride in natural mineral water was not permitted to be more than 5 mg/l. We understood that natural mineral water that contained more than 1.5 mg/l of fluoride was not suitable for regular consumption by infants and children under 7 years of age, and a specific form of words had to be used on the label to indicate that information; although we noted it was not identified as unsuitable for consumption by pregnant woman. We understood from the FSA that pregnant women in general were not any more sensitive to higher levels of sodium, sulphate and fluoride than the general population.

We noted that the ad stated "Some natural mineral waters can contain high levels of certain substances", and considered that this provided context for the questioned claim and that consumers would understand that the claim related to levels of sodium, fluoride and sulphate in natural mineral water. Because the ad specified that "natural mineral waters can contain high levels of certain substances", we considered that the context was clear and the warning to check the water quality analysis on the label was reasonable. We therefore concluded that ad was unlikely to mislead or cause undue fear.

On that point, we investigated the ad under CAP Code clauses 3.1 (Substantiation), 7.1 (Truthfulness), 9.1 (Fear and distress), 10.1 (Safety) and 19.1 (Other comparisons), but did not find it in breach.

3. Not upheld

We noted that the ad clearly stated that tap water used in babies feeds should be boiled before adding to the feed. We understood that this was in line with FSA guidance which promoted the use of tap water from the kitchen tap, pre-boiled and cooled, for babies under six months. In addition, we noted that the ad set out the problems associated with lead pipes, explained which consumers were more likely to be affected and stated that any concerned consumers could have their pipes tested free of charge.

Because the ad clearly explained the circumstances in which tap water could be used for babies feeds and how readers could have their pipes checked if they were unsure, and because the recommendation to use pre-boiled tap water was in line with FSA guidance, we did not conclude that the claim "It is perfectly safe to use tap water to make babies feeds" in the context of this ad was misleading.

On that point, we investigated the ad under CAP Code clauses 3.1 (Substantiation), 7.1 (Truthfulness), 9.1 (Fear and distress), 10.1 (Safety) and 19.1 (Other comparisons), but did not find it in breach.

Action

No further action necessary.

Adjudication of the ASA Council (Non-broadcast)