Sanofi Pasteur MSD: Shingles ‘advertorial’ and linked websites ruled to promote Zostavax to the public (AUTH/2526/8/12)

📊

Key facts

⌄

Case	AUTH/2526/8/12
Complainant	Doctor
Company	Sanofi Pasteur MSD Ltd
Medicine referenced in case context	Zostavax (shingles (herpes zoster) vaccine (live))
Channel/material	Lifestyle magazine advertorial-style advertisement plus QR code/URLs to a company-sponsored shingles awareness website and an independent patient organisation website
Main issue	Combined effect of ad and linked websites amounted to promotion of a prescription-only medicine to the public; lack of balance with disproportionate emphasis on vaccination
Applicable Code year	2012
Complaint received	25 July 2012
Case completed	28 September 2012
Outcome	Breach of Clauses 9.1, 22.1 and 22.2; no breach of Clause 2
Sanctions	Undertaking received; additional sanctions not stated
Appeal	No appeal

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

🎬 Expert Video Walkthrough

🎬

Video walkthrough — coming for members

Subscribe now and get expert video analysis for every case as we publish them.

Subscribe — from £299/yr

📋

⌄

A doctor complained about a lifestyle magazine advertisement (ref UK15219n 04/12) presented in an advertorial style with a ‘Shingles Aware’ logo.
The headline stated: “If, like 90% of UK adults, you have ever had chickenpox, there is a 1 in 4 chance you will develop shingles at some point in your lifetime”.
The advert described shingles symptoms and urged readers to see a GP quickly, then featured prominent statements: “It is possible to prevent shingles” and “See your GP who can give you more information”.
The advert directed readers (including via QR code) to the company-sponsored “shingles aware” website and to an independent patient organisation website.
Sanofi Pasteur MSD had recently launched Zostavax and the Panel noted it was the only medicine for prevention of shingles.
The shingles aware website homepage highlighted “shingles vaccination” and included a public-page button “Can shingles be prevented?” leading to text encouraging readers to speak to a GP/healthcare professional.
The patient organisation website homepage featured a news item stating a shingles vaccine was available and named “Zostavax”.

⚖️

⌄

The Panel ruled that the combined effect of the advertisement and the referenced websites promoted Zostavax to the general public.
The Panel ruled the combined material was not balanced, with disproportionate emphasis on vaccination (including naming the vaccine on the patient organisation site).
No breach of Clause 2 was ruled (the Panel considered Clause 9.1 provided adequate censure).
No appeal.

🔒

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