Proya sold Ruby Cream as 'anti-aging' — the registered claim only allows 'anti-wrinkle'

Proya's Ruby Cream 3.0, launched in 2023, was a hit: by June 2025 it had sold more than 700,000 units on Tmall and topped the brand's face-cream repurchase list. Its own store page and livestreams described the product as opening 'a new era of anti-aging' and 'scientific anti-aging technology'.

Chinese cosmetics rules draw a hard line: the National Medical Products Administration's efficacy-claim rules list 20 allowed claims, and 'anti-aging' (抗老) is not among them — 'anti-wrinkle', 'firming' and 'soothing' are. When media checked the product's filed efficacy, it did not include 'anti-aging': Southern Metropolis found only 'anti-wrinkle', while others listed moisturising and soothing.

In late June 2025 three outlets — China Youth Daily, cnr.cn and Southern Metropolis Daily — ran investigations. They showed the brand's own store used 'anti-aging' while the flagship store used 'anti-wrinkle' for the same product, and that livestream hosts still answered 'anti-aging' when asked.

No fine against Proya has been reported, but the same claim has already drawn penalties: Linsenxuan was fined ¥21,234 by a Beijing regulator for 'anti-aging' wording, and a Shanghai cosmetics company was fined ¥21,000 in February 2025. Turning a 700,000-unit bestseller into the face of an overclaim put the trust gap on show.

Kept the unapproved 'anti-aging' term on a 700k-sold bestseller while filings said 'anti-wrinkle', drawing media exposure and risking fines like Linsenxuan's ¥21,234.

Claiming a benefit the regulator does not even list made the brand's flagship product the example of an overclaim

Letting store pages and livestreams run 'anti-aging' while the filed claim was only 'anti-wrinkle' invited a media takedown

Keeping a term that had already drawn fines showed the brand was betting regulators would not notice

Don't sell a cosmetic with a claim the regulator doesn't list — Proya touted 'anti-aging' for Ruby Cream when filings only allow 'anti-wrinkle', and media turned its bestseller into a broken claim.

Proya did not immediately respond to the June 2025 investigations. The exposure put a hero product — more than 700,000 units sold on Tmall — in a national debate over the disallowed 'anti-aging' claim. Linsenxuan was fined ¥21,234.5 for 'anti-aging' wording, and a Shanghai firm was fined ¥21,000 in February 2025. Because 'anti-aging' is not among the 20 approved efficacy claims, cosmetics using it risk an Advertising Law violation and false-advertising exposure. No regulator had fined Proya itself, leaving the episode a trust risk, not a confirmed penalty.