Earlier this year, Gwyneth Paltrow told critics of her lifestyle brand Goop to “bring their A-game”.
And... well, they have.
Non-profit organisation Tina.org (Truth in Advertising) alleges that there have been 51 instances in which Goop has claimed, either on its website or at its conference in LA earlier this summer, that its products (or third-party products it promotes) “alleviate the symptoms of, or reduce the risk of developing a number of ailments, ranging from depression, anxiety, and insomnia, to infertility, uterine prolapse, and arthritis, just to name a few”.
The problem here is that Goop does not have any of the scientific evidence required by law to make these claims, Tina.org claims.
The organisation issued a warning to Goop in August that it would alert government regulators if they didn’t rectify the problem.They have has since filed a complaint with two California district attorneys who are part of the California Food, Drug and Medical Device Task Force, “urging the regulators to investigate Goop’s marketing and take appropriate enforcement action".
TINA.org is not the first group or person to question the science behind Goop’s health claims.
Everyone from “Late Show” host Stephen Colbert to a former chief scientist at NASA has accused Goop of promoting pseudoscience, while Paltrow has challenged anyone who seeks to criticize the brand she founded nine years ago to bring their A game.
A Goop spokesperson issued the following statement to the Hollywood Reporter in response to the situation:
Goop is dedicated to introducing unique products and offerings and encouraging constructive conversation surrounding new ideas.
We are receptive to feedback and consistently seek to improve the quality of the products and information referenced on our site.
We responded promptly and in good faith to the initial outreach from representatives of TINA and hoped to engage with them to address their concerns.
Unfortunately, they provided limited information and made threats under arbitrary deadlines which were not reasonable under the circumstances. Nevertheless, while we believe that TINA's description of our interactions is misleading and their claims unsubstantiated and unfounded, we will continue to evaluate our products and our content and make those improvements that we believe are reasonable and necessary in the interests of our community of users.