What is the basis for Piaorou to remove the scraps? Procter & Gamble customer service answered secrets

Herald reporter Chen Tong/Wen

There are a lot of shampoos with the effect of deducting dandruff effects in the market, but whether these products can be dandruff, I am afraid that ordinary consumers are difficult to judge. Recently, some readers mentioned this issue to the “Market Herald” rights protection center. According to relevant questions, the Herald reporter conducted an inquiry.

Consumer: Dandruff effect has not been effective

According to reader Xiaoyong, he has always had a lot of dandruff and never cared too much. A while ago, when he was shopping in the supermarket, he inadvertently selected Piandou -free washing by Procter & Gamble. Thinking of his dander, Xiaoyong felt that it was time to treat it seriously. So, for a period of time, he insisted on using this bottle of washing.

“I thought that even if this kind of professional dedue product, even if the effect of cure was not achieved, it would be a bit improved!” When it was reported to this newspaper, Xiaoyong said puzzledly that this one with Piaorou’s model was used. The product did not feel the change at all. After a few months, the dandruff is still a lot. With a comb, dandruff is like snowflakes, and it is still the same as before.

According to Xiaoyong’s description, the Herald reporter checked the product. Packaging shows that this belongs to “Family Nursing Series Rejoice Fluttering -Lanhua’s long refreshing and dedue washing out”. Related text also declares “lasting fresh and smooth, away from dandruff trouble”, “contain clean factor and soft factor, clean hair and form a smooth film on the surface, so that the hair keeps clean and soft for a long time”, “including ZPT dedlicular dandruff Ingredients, effectively remove dandruff, continue to use, stay away from dandruff trouble. “

Procter & Gamble: Involved in confidentiality cannot be notified

Why can’t consumers feel the removal effects that are highly prominent on the outer packaging? What is the basis for the dedue of the dandruff and the exposure of Piaorou? With questions, the Herald reporter recently sent an interview letter through the website of Procter & Gamble (China) Co., Ltd., but he did not get a response.

Subsequently, the Herald reporter called the consultation hotline of Procter & Gamble’s shampoo hair care products in the name of consumers, and asked about the principles of ded items and related authoritative certificates. Because the response could not be made immediately, the wiring personnel recorded the request. The next day, the hotline staff called.

“We feedback this issue to the company. Because it is related to the secrets of the company, we can’t inform them for the time being.” While a lady explained, it also further explained that the reason for affecting the dedue effect is more diverse. The effect on everyone’s hair, the effect will be different. She suggested that the reporter tried to Dandruff products from other series.

As a large -selling point of dedration, merchants answered the same secrets, which is obviously incompetent. When the Herald reporter repeatedly raised his objection, the hotline staff still repeatedly stated that “there is really no way to inform, this involves secrets!”

Lawyer: Dandruff proves non -commercial secrets

Is this response from merchants legal? Some consumers pointed out that according to the “Consumer Rights Protection Law”, consumers enjoy the right to know the real situation of the goods they purchased and used. Consumers have the right to ask operators to provide the relevant situation of the goods. In addition, the efficacy involved in product propaganda should also be true and accurate, and should be informed of the source. The practice that the merchant refused to inform violated the relevant laws.


“If confidentiality can be a reason, any company can claim nothing about that its own products have such effects or that, and then avoid any questions from the outside world on the grounds of secrets!” The person pointed out.

Lawyer Xu Xiaoyan, Zhejiang Xingyun Law Firm, also questioned the so -called “business secrets” of the merchant. She believes that consumers ask not to dedrate the secret recipe, but the proof of dediviring function, which does not involve commercial secrets. According to the law, the product should have the function of its announcement. The shampoo claiming that it can dedrate and naturally have this function. In this regard, the operator shall bear the responsibility of proof.

Faced with the questioning of professionals, will Procter & Gamble issued a proof of ded items? “Market Herald” will continue to pay attention.