The Advertising Standards Authority has upheld a complaint against pet brand NutriPaw over a social media advertising campaign promoting a dog dental care product.
NutriPaw Ltd (t/a Healthy Dog) apologised to the ASA, stating the ad had been removed and would not be used again. The company explained it had improved its advertising approval process to ensure similar issues did not occur in the future.
A paid-for Facebook ad for Healthy Dog 24/7, seen on 22 April 2026, promoted NutriPaw’s Dental Powder, a dog dental care product, displayed text that stated, “Bad Breath […] the dental range makes it simple” and featured an embedded video that opened with text and narration that stated, “If you've ever signed a form that lists death as a risk of anaesthesia [sic] just to get your dog's teeth cleaned, drop everything and listen.” The ad was narrated in the first person by a woman wearing vet clothing who stated, “After 14 years as a veterinary dental specialist”.
The narration, accompanied by on-screen text stated, “There are three lies every dog owner believes that are literally killing their pets. Lie number one, anaesthesia is routine and perfectly safe […] healthy dogs go under for a tooth cleaning and never wake up. […] Lie #2 Professional cleaning is the only way to remove tartar. This is the most profitable lie in veterinary medicine. The science exists to break it down safely at home. They just don’t want you to know.” The ad also stated, “Three dogs same month, all routine cleanings, all healthy screenings, all dead”, and “One in 1,000 healthy dogs die under anaesthesia. For senior dogs, higher. For dogs with heart murmurs, higher still. And they’re dying for a teeth cleaning”.
The ad also stated, “you’re trapped between two impossible choices. Sign the waiver, say the goodbye, hope your dog wakes up […] or do nothing. Watch bacteria spread from their mouth into their bloodstream. Watch their organs fail slowly. Both options feel like killing your dog.”
The ad further stated, “I found Dr. Rachel Chen veterinary dental specialist […] she spent two years developing an enzymatic formula that breaks down tartar cement at the molecular level for conscious, non-sedated dogs” and, “I tested it on a 10-year-old beagle […] severe tartar. Heart murmur […] anaesthesia was too risky […] day three […] the brown cement edges were starting to soften. Day seven, a chunk of tartar literally fell off while he was eating […] Day 21, his teeth looked cleaner than they had in five years”.
It also stated, “I ran a real trial. 47 dogs […] 90 days later, 43 showed dramatic tartar reduction. 18 dogs too old for anaesthesia got clean teeth for the first time in years […] at-home powder that uses natural enzymes to shatter calcified tartar at the molecular level […] without risking your dog's life. How it works? Kelp enzymes penetrate the tartar element and break the calcium bonds […] spirulina seals the microscopic gaps in gums, leaky gums […] peppermint kills the bacteria […] stopping sulpfur [sic] that create the death breath smell. One scoop in their food […] NutriPaw's dental powder is the only way to get professional-grade tartar breakdown without playing anaesthesia roulette.”
Montage imagery, throughout the ad accompanied the narration, showed owners with dogs, individuals visibly upset and individuals being physically sick as well as dogs undergoing veterinary procedures, including anaesthetic, dental treatment, injections and CPR. The ad also showed mouths and teeth of multiple dogs with severe plaque and tartar, that were brown and yellow in colour; then later imagery of mouths of other dogs with clean, white teeth.
The ASA said the complainant challenged whether:
- the ad misleadingly and irresponsibly implied dogs undergoing veterinary treatment had a higher chance of dying;
- the ad made medicinal claims for an unauthorised product; and
- the efficacy claims for NutriPaw’s Dental Powder were misleading.
In its ruling the ASA said:” The ad must not appear again in the form complained about. We told NutriPaw Ltd t/a Healthy Dog to not make efficacy claims unless they held adequate, robust evidence and not to make medicinal claims for an unauthorised product. We also told them not to misleadingly and irresponsibly imply dogs undergoing veterinary treatment had a higher chance of dying.”
The full ASA report can be viewed by clicking here.
