The encyclopedia · Advertising & PR · Marketing decision · 2026
Pull Charm sold a 'Nobel-class' hair tonic with fake before-and-afters — Tokyo banned it
Fake before-and-after photos, fake SNS reviews, fake scarcity and a Nobel Prize claim: Tokyo found seven violations in one hair tonic campaign.
Pull Charm · 2026-03-23
What happened
Pull Charm, an ecommerce company in Tokyo's Meguro ward, sold the hair tonic Ikumo Nano Grow Rich through websites reached from Instagram ads. The campaign carried five superiority-misleading claims, including 'the state has approved its hair-growth effect' and 'over 90% felt results'. The substantiation the company submitted was not accepted as reasonable grounds.
The proof had been manufactured. Before-and-after images were composites built from photos of thinning heads, not results of the product. Testimonials styled as SNS user posts were written by the ad agency. 'Nobel-class' hair growth borrowed from a decades-old Nobel Prize for vitamin research. 'Order early or miss out' scarcity ran while stock was ample.
Two more violations were stealth marketing: the agency-built sites carried no 'Ad' or 'PR' label, and the 'hair diagnosis expert' on the sales site was the company's own employee, undisclosed as such. On 23 March 2026 Tokyo issued an action order under the Act against Unjustifiable Premiums and Misleading Representations: publicise the violations to consumers, do not repeat them, and train staff on prevention.
Why it happened
- Before-and-after photos were composites and user testimonials were written by the ad agency — the proof of efficacy was manufactured, not collected.
- Authority was borrowed wholesale: 'state-approved' hair growth and an old Nobel Prize for vitamin research became a 'Nobel-class' claim for one tonic.
- The sites were agency-controlled with no ad label, and the 'independent expert' was staff — stealth marketing by design, not by oversight.
- Scarcity claims ran while stock was ample: the urgency was scripted, and the script became one of seven violations.
The lesson
Fabricated proof collapses in a single order: fake before-and-afters, fake reviews, fake scarcity and a fake Nobel sank one tonic. Every testimonial needs a real person.
Aftermath
Pull Charm was ordered to tell consumers that its displays violated the Act against Unjustifiable Premiums and Misleading Representations, to stop similar claims, and to brief its officers and staff on prevention measures. The case was one of the first action orders pairing fabricated-efficacy claims with breaches of Japan's 2023 stealth-marketing notice.
Sources
- Tokyo Metropolitan Government: action order on misleading claims for a mail-order hair tonic (23 March 2026)
- Tsuhanshinbun: action order for Pull Charm over stealth marketing in hair tonic mail order
spotted an error? The club wants to know.
More like this
Plucharm's 'Nobel-winning' hair tonic ads faked proof and a sell-out
Freis Labo's 'after NHK, sold out' serum ads buried a fake campaign
Three beauty salons faked coupon deadlines that never actually expired
Somewhere, someone solved the problem this company failed at. 2nd Opinion →

Comments · 0
Sign in to join the comments.