Procter & Gamble and Sanofi-Aventis: Actonel Combi promotional email and prior consent (AUTH/2111/3/08 & AUTH/2112/3/08)

📊

Key facts

⌄

Case number	AUTH/2111/3/08 and AUTH/2112/3/08
Case reference	ACT 3811 (email reference)
Complainant	General practitioner
Respondent/company	Procter & Gamble Pharmaceuticals UK Limited and Sanofi-Aventis (joint response as The Alliance for Better Bone Health)
Product(s)	Actonel Combi (risedronate sodium tablets plus calcium and vitamin D effervescent granules)
Material/channel	Promotional email (sent via an agency)
Key issue	Whether the promotional email was unsolicited / whether prior permission existed for email promotion
Dates (received/completed if stated)	Complaint received 25 March 2008; cases completed 20 May 2008
Appeal	Not stated
Code year	Not stated
Breaches/clauses	No breach; Clause 9.9 considered
Sanctions	No explicit additional sanctions stated beyond the required undertaking/corrective actions described in the report

Reviewed by Dr Anzal Qurbain (FFPM) — ABPI Final Signatory

🤖

Got a question about this case?

Ask one of our 13 specialist ABPI advisors — instant answers, 24/7.

Ask AskAnzal AI

📋

⌄

A general practitioner complained about an email received in March 2008 relating to Actonel Combi (risedronate sodium tablets plus calcium and vitamin D effervescent granules).
Actonel Combi was co-promoted by Procter & Gamble Pharmaceuticals UK Limited and Sanofi-Aventis; the matter was taken up with both companies.
The complainant (via the practice manager) said the email was unsolicited and “singularly inappropriate”.
The Authority asked the companies to respond in relation to Clause 9.9 (use of email for promotional purposes).
The companies provided a joint response as The Alliance for Better Bone Health, stating the email was sent by an agency operating a permission-based, opt-in database.
The agency’s process included: telephone contact, sending a sign-up code to the doctor’s personal email address, and a confirmation email explaining that emails “may include” pharmaceutical promotional materials; the complainant then used the web address and access code to complete registration in early March.

⚖️

⌄

The Panel considered the Actonel Combi email was clearly promotional material.
The Panel reiterated that companies are responsible under the Code for work undertaken by third parties on their behalf.
The Panel concluded the email was not unsolicited because the complainant had given prior, fully informed consent to receive promotional emails via the agency’s opt-in process.
No breach of Clause 9.9 was ruled.

🔒

Members get the complete breakdown — Clauses, Sanction, Signatory Lens, Audit checklist, and 3 Key Questions.

Best value

£249/year

Annual — save £99

£29/mo

Monthly

Join Now — Instant Access