GuruNanda Pulling Oil Case: What the NAD and NARB Decisions Mean for Natural Oral Care Claims

In recent years, the oral care market has seen a surge in products touting natural ingredients and traditional remedies, with oil pulling emerging as a popular trend among consumers seeking holistic dental health solutions. GuruNanda, a brand well-known for its essential oils and Ayurvedic inspired products, entered this market with its “pulling oil” mouthwash, promising benefits like “natural teeth whitening” and a "dazzling smile" from the very first use. However, these bold claims soon attracted scrutiny, leading to a high-profile challenge before the National Advertising Division (NAD) and a subsequent appeal to the National Advertising Review Board (NARB). Here, we will discuss the details of the GuruNanda pulling oil case, the regulatory process, the scientific standards for health claims in advertising, and what the outcome means for both brands and consumers interested in natural oral care.

Understanding Oil Pulling and GuruNanda’s Product

Oil pulling is an ancient Ayurvedic practice that involves swishing oil, typically coconut, sesame, or sunflower oil, in the mouth for several minutes. Proponents claim it can draw out toxins, improve oral hygiene, and even whiten teeth. GuruNanda’s pulling oil is a blend of these oils, marketed as a modern, convenient adaptation of this traditional remedy. The product gained traction among health conscious consumers, with marketing materials highlighting its “natural teeth whitening” capability and suggesting users could “dazzle from first application.” These claims positioned GuruNanda as a leader in the natural oral care space, appealing to those seeking alternatives to chemical-based whitening products.

The NAD Challenge: Procter & Gamble Steps In

The advertising claims made by GuruNanda did not go unnoticed by competitors. The Procter & Gamble Company, a major player in the oral care market, challenged GuruNanda’s whitening claims before the National Advertising Division, a self-regulatory body that reviews national advertising for truthfulness and accuracy (Case No. 7377). The NAD is part of BBB National Programs and serves as a forum for resolving advertising disputes outside of court, helping to maintain industry standards and protect consumers from misleading claims. In this case, Procter & Gamble argued that GuruNanda’s claims of “natural teeth whitening” and “dazzle from first application” were unsubstantiated and could mislead consumers about the efficacy of the pulling oil product.

The Evidence: What Studies Did GuruNanda Provide?

In response to the NAD inquiry, GuruNanda submitted two studies intended to support its whitening claims. These studies, conducted by independent laboratories, examined the effects of GuruNanda’s pulling oil on tooth color over a period of regular use. The studies reported some degree of whitening among participants, suggesting a potential benefit from the product. However, the NAD conducted a thorough review of the methodology and results, looking for the “competent and reliable scientific evidence” required for health-related advertising claims. This standard typically demands well-controlled, double-blind clinical trials with sufficient sample sizes and methodologies that reflect actual consumer use.

NAD’s Findings: Method Flaws and Insufficient Substantiation

After reviewing the studies, the NAD identified several significant shortcomings. One major issue was the lack of a proper negative control group in the primary study. Without a group of participants who did not use the pulling oil, it was impossible to determine whether the observed whitening was due to the product itself or other factors, such as changes in participants’ diets or oral hygiene routines. Additionally, the studies excluded participants who regularly consumed coffee, tea, or other staining beverages, which does not reflect the habits of typical U.S. consumers. The studies were also conducted outside the United States, raising questions about the applicability of the results to the target market.

The NAD concluded that these methodological flaws undermined the reliability of the evidence. While the studies suggested a possible whitening effect, they did not meet the rigorous standards required to substantiate the advertising claims as consumers would understand them. As a result, the NAD recommended that GuruNanda discontinue the “natural teeth whitening” and “dazzle from first application” claims.

GuruNanda’s Response: Partial Compliance and an Appeal

Following the NAD’s decision, GuruNanda agreed to voluntarily discontinue several of the challenged claims, including “dazzle from first application.” However, the company disagreed with the NAD’s assessment of the “natural teeth whitening” claim and chose to appeal the decision to the National Advertising Review Board, or NARB. The NARB serves as the appellate body for NAD cases, providing an additional layer of review and ensuring fairness in the self-regulatory process. GuruNanda maintained that its studies demonstrated a whitening benefit and argued that the NAD’s standards were overly stringent given the nature of the product and the available evidence.

The NARB Review: Upholding the NAD’s Recommendations

In February 2025, the NARB issued its decision, upholding the NAD’s recommendation that GuruNanda discontinue the “natural teeth whitening” claim. The NARB agreed that the studies submitted by GuruNanda did not constitute competent and reliable scientific evidence, primarily due to the lack of a negative control group, the exclusion of common dietary habits, and the non-representative study population. The NARB emphasized that health related claims, particularly those involving visible results like teeth whitening, require robust substantiation to avoid misleading consumers. While acknowledging that the studies suggested a possible whitening effect, the NARB concluded that they were not sufficiently rigorous to support the advertising claims.

GuruNanda responded by stating that it respectfully disagreed with the NARB’s analysis but would comply with the recommendation. The company also indicated that it was conducting further research to substantiate its product’s benefits and would revisit its advertising claims if new evidence became available.

Why Scientific Standards Matter in Health Related Advertising

The GuruNanda case highlights the importance of scientific rigor in health-related advertising. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and self-regulatory bodies like the NAD and NARB require that companies making health or efficacy claims for their products possess “competent and reliable scientific evidence.” This standard is designed to protect consumers from misleading or exaggerated claims that could influence their purchasing decisions. In the context of oral care products, where consumers are often seeking visible results like whiter teeth or fresher breath, the need for reliable evidence is especially critical.

For a claim like “natural teeth whitening,” advertisers must demonstrate through well-designed clinical trials that the product produces a statistically significant whitening effect compared to a control group. The studies must be conducted under conditions that reflect typical consumer use, including common dietary habits and oral hygiene routines. Excluding participants who drink coffee or tea, for example, may artificially inflate the perceived efficacy of a whitening product, as these beverages are known to stain teeth. Similarly, conducting studies outside the target market can introduce variables that limit the generalizability of the results.

The Role of NAD and NARB in Advertising Self-Regulation

The NAD and NARB play a crucial role in maintaining the integrity of advertising in the United States. By providing a forum for resolving disputes and reviewing the substantiation of advertising claims, these bodies help ensure that consumers receive accurate information and that companies compete fairly. The self-regulatory process is designed to be faster and less adversarial than litigation, allowing for timely resolution of issues and voluntary compliance by advertisers. In the GuruNanda case, the process allowed for a thorough review of the evidence, an opportunity for appeal, and a final decision that balanced the interests of consumers and advertisers.

Implications for Natural Oral Care Brands

The outcome of the GuruNanda pulling oil case sends a clear message to other brands in the natural oral care space. While consumers are increasingly interested in natural and holistic products, companies must be careful not to overstate the benefits of their offerings without solid scientific backing. Claims related to teeth whitening, cavity prevention, or other health benefits must be supported by rigorous clinical evidence that meets industry standards. Brands that fail to meet these standards risk challenges from competitors, regulatory scrutiny, and damage to their reputation.

At the same time, the case demonstrates that the regulatory process is not inherently hostile to innovation or traditional remedies. Companies are encouraged to invest in high-quality research to substantiate their claims and to be transparent with consumers about the limitations of their products. As the market for natural oral care continues to grow, brands that prioritize scientific integrity and consumer trust are likely to thrive.

What Consumers Should Know About Oil Pulling and Whitening Claims

For consumers, the GuruNanda case is a reminder to approach health and wellness claims with a critical eye. While oil pulling may offer some benefits for oral hygiene, the evidence supporting its ability to whiten teeth is limited and not as robust as that for conventional whitening products. Consumers should look for products with clear, substantiated claims and be wary of promises that sound too good to be true.

Consulting with dental professionals and seeking out information from reputable sources can help consumers make informed choices about their oral care routines.

It’s also important to recognize that natural does not always mean better or safer. While many natural ingredients have a long history of use, they are not immune to the need for scientific validation. The regulatory process exists to ensure that all products, whether natural or synthetic, meet the same standards of efficacy and safety.

The Future of Natural Oral Care and Advertising Standards

The GuruNanda pulling oil case is likely to influence the future direction of advertising in the natural oral care market. As consumer demand for natural products continues to rise, brands will need to invest in high-quality research to substantiate their claims and differentiate themselves from competitors. Regulatory bodies and self-regulatory organizations will continue to play a vital role in ensuring that advertising remains truthful and not misleading, fostering a marketplace where innovation and consumer protection go hand in hand.

For GuruNanda, the case represents both a setback and an opportunity. By committing to further research and compliance with advertising standards, the company can rebuild trust and potentially reintroduce substantiated claims in the future. For other brands, the case serves as a cautionary tale and a call to action to prioritize scientific rigor in product development and marketing.

Lessons from the GuruNanda Pulling Oil Case

The GuruNanda pulling oil case offers valuable lessons for brands, consumers, and regulators alike. It underscores the importance of scientific substantiation in health-related advertising, the role of self-regulatory bodies in maintaining industry standards, and the need for transparency and integrity in marketing natural products. As the oral care market continues to evolve, these principles will remain essential for fostering consumer trust and promoting innovation. Whether you’re a brand looking to launch a new product or a consumer seeking the best oral care solutions, the GuruNanda case is a reminder that claims should always be backed by solid evidence and clear communication.

For more information on the NAD and NARB processes, you can visit the BBB National Programs website. To learn more about oil pulling and its potential benefits, consult reputable dental associations such as the American Dental Association. If you’re interested in the details of the GuruNanda case, the full NAD and NARB decisions are available on the BBB National Programs’ case reports page.

By staying informed and demanding high standards from brands, consumers can help shape a marketplace that values both natural innovation and scientific integrity.

---

Howard Law is a business, regulatory and M&A law firm in the greater Charlotte, North Carolina area, with additional services in M&A advisory and business brokerage. Howard Law is a law firm based in the greater Charlotte, North Carolina area focused on business law, corporate law, regulatory law, mergers & acquisitions, M&A advisor and business brokerage. Handling all business matters from incorporation to acquisition as well as a comprehensive understanding in assisting through mergers and acquisition. The choice of a lawyer is an important decision and should not be based solely on advertisements. The information on this website is for general and informational purposes only and should not be interpreted to indicate a certain result will occur in your specific legal situation. Information on this website is not legal advice and does not create an attorney-client relationship. You should consult an attorney for advice regarding your individual situation. Contacting us does not create an attorney-client relationship. Please do not send any confidential information to us until such time as an attorney-client relationship has been established.