Writing Compliant Product Claims for EMS Fascia Guns
Adding stimulation to a percussion device moves the claim position, and the sentences that were safe on a plain massage gun are often not safe here.
A plain percussion gun can describe percussion safely, because the mechanism is mechanical and the outcome is a sensation. Adding electrical stimulation changes that position, and copy carried over from a percussion-only product often crosses a line the original never approached.
Supportable wording for the combined device describes both actions factually: percussive massage combined with micro-current stimulation, dual-mode relaxation routine, adjustable depth with optional electrical stimulation. These statements describe the device and claim no clinical result.
What to avoid is the vocabulary of therapy applied to the stimulation mode specifically. Phrases describing nerve stimulation for pain, muscle re-education or recovery from injury all point toward a therapeutic intended use, and that is what triggers reclassification.
The practical discipline is to write the stimulation copy last and check it against the safety labelling. If the manual tells users with implanted electronic devices not to use the product, a claim that implies medical benefit is internally inconsistent, and that inconsistency is what reviewers act on.
Aolemon supplies EMS fascia guns with claim wording written per mode, reviewed against the manual and the warning page, and keeps the approved text so that packaging updates do not drift back toward therapeutic language.