Supplements & cosmetics · SFDA
Supplement and cosmetic ads: the SFDA claims that get them pulled
Sample the supplement and cosmetic ads running into Saudi Arabia this month and one pattern repeats: a number that sounds like proof. “98% of people said their skin felt instantly refreshed.” “Proven results.” “Unmatched effectiveness.” “Safe, no side effects.” Each of those is a specific line in the SFDA’s promotion rules — and the ad usually carries no registration reference and no pre-approval, which are the two things that actually decide whether it should have run at all.
Who this applies to
Anyone advertising a dietary supplement, herbal product, cosmetic, or medical device to people in Saudi Arabia — the brand, the e-commerce store, the pharmacy that resells it, and the agency or creator running the ad. Whether the product is registered abroad does not matter; if the audience is in the Kingdom, the SFDA promotion rules apply, and consumer advertising must be in Arabic. Prescription-only medicines cannot be advertised to the public at all (CMS Law art. 36).
The claims that trip the rules
| What the ad says | Clause | Why it’s a problem |
|---|---|---|
| “98% said…”, “proven results”, a cure / treatment / weight-loss claim | SFDA 2-21 | An efficacy or treatment claim presented as fact. A survey percentage is not substantiation, and cosmetics may not claim to treat. |
| “best”, “#1”, “100%”, “guaranteed”, “miracle”, “unmatched” (فعالية بلا مثيل) | SFDA 2-21 | Superlatives and absolutes are treated as misleading unless substantiated. This is the single most common miss. |
| “no side effects”, “completely safe”, “non-addictive” | SFDA 2-23 | Safety-absolute claims are prohibited outright. |
| “better than [competitor]”, or any comparison without evidence | SFDA 2-12 to 2-14, 2-22 | Unsubstantiated comparisons and disparaging a competitor are both barred. |
| A lab or animal study used to imply a human effect | SFDA 2-15 | You cannot present in-vitro or animal data as if it shows a result in people. |
| Before/after images or a testimonial shown as proof of effect | SFDA 2-21 | Read as an unsubstantiated efficacy claim; the creative carries the same weight as the text. |
The two things reviewers look for first
Before any of the claims above, an SFDA-reviewed ad is expected to carry a registration or notification reference for the product, and health-product promotional material generally needs prior SFDA approval(SFDA 2-31; the CMS pre-approval fee is SAR 14,000). In practice the brand’s own creators often print the approval number on a video while the store’s own ad for the same product runs without it — the number exists, it just isn’t in every ad. Penalties under the CMS Law reach SAR 5,000,000 and up to a 180-day closure (arts. 35, 42), so the missing line is not a formality.
Three-line self-check for any supplement or cosmetic ad:(1) Does it state any effect as proven — a percentage, “proven”, a cure, weight loss? (2) Does it use a superlative or an absolute — best, #1, 100%, guaranteed, no side effects? (3) Is the product’s SFDA registration / approval reference in the ad itself? If (1) or (2) is yes, or (3) is no, fix before the next ad set.
Check a live ad in ten seconds
Paste the ad copy, pick “pharma / supplements” or “food / cosmetics”, and FormicGuard flags each claim against the SFDA clause it trips — with the clause number next to the finding. Copy checks are unlimited and free, no card.
- SFDA — Code of Conduct for Promotional Practices of Pharmaceutical and Herbal Products (SFDA/42/2024), clauses 2-1 to 2-31, sfda.gov.sa. Clause numbers above refer to this text.
- Executive Regulations of the Cosmetic Products and Medical Devices (CMS) Law — arts. 35, 36, 42.
FormicGuard is a pre-publication risk check, not legal advice or regulatory clearance. Regulations change; confirm against the current text at sfda.gov.sa. Guide index: all guides.