Öko-Test finds insufficient evidence for deodorant claims of up to 72‑hour freshness
Executive summary: Öko-Test tested deodorant products advertised with 24‑, 48‑ or 72‑hour freshness and found the evidence insufficient to back up those claims. The result challenges the reliability of performance‑based advertising in personal care and could trigger regulatory or consumer‑backlash pressure on manufacturers.
Who is involved: Deodorant manufacturers, Öko-Test magazine, Consumers
Likely next: Brands may need to revise claims or provide additional test data; regulators may monitor advertising more closely; consumer groups could file complaints if they feel misled.
Öko-Test examined manufacturers’ promises that deodorants keep underarms fresh for as long as three days and concluded that the data supporting such long‑lasting protection are lacking. The investigation highlights a gap between marketing assertions and verifiable product performance in the personal‑care sector. While the magazine did not issue a formal rating, its scrutiny raises questions about the credibility of extreme freshness claims and may prompt calls for greater substantiation.
Timeline
- — Frisch bleiben bei Hitze: Bis zu 72 Stunden Deo-Schutz? „Öko-Test“ fehlen gute Belege (Handelsblatt)
- — Blow-Ups und Co.: So reagieren Sie bei Straßenschäden durch Hitze (Handelsblatt)
Analysis — what this means
Sectors affected
- Personal care
- Consumer goods
Regulatory implications
- Need for clearer substantiation requirements for performance promises like '24‑hour freshness'.
Historical parallels
- Past ASA rulings on exaggerated durability claims in textiles (e.g., '50‑wash' guarantees).
- Similar scrutiny of '24‑hour' deodorant claims in the early 2000s leading to revised labeling.
Key entities
Sources
Open the full interactive case file on Beyond →