ASA Non-broadcast Adjudication: Ashraf Uddin Ahmed

Complaint

The London Free Homeopathic Health Centre objected to a TV ad and an ad in a weekly local paper, in Bengali, for homeopathy.

a. The TV ad showed three men in a waiting room. A voiceover in Bengali said "For the cure of complex and serious diseases, come to Ashraf Herbal Homeo Medical Centre". The first man said "Doctor Ashraf is a renowned doctor from Bangladesh. He has 22 long years of experience"; the second said "I have been benefited by his treatment. He is an experienced doctor"; the third man said "I went to many places. Only his treatment proved beneficial for me."

b. The text in the press ad stated "Take care of your health -- live a healthy, comfortable and beautiful life ... For the consultation and treatment of gaining or losing weight, high blood pressure, diabetes ...".

1. The complainant challenged whether TV ad (a) and press ad (b) misleadingly implied that the advertiser was qualified to practice homeopathy.

The ASA challenged:

2. whether, by using the prefix "Dr", the TV ad and press ad misleadingly implied Ashraf Ahmed had a general medical qualification or, if the prefix referred to his homeopathic qualifications, whether the extent of his experience had been exaggerated and

3. whether the references to serious medical conditions in the TV ad and press ad could discourage readers from seeking advice from suitably qualified medical professionals.

CAP Code (Edition 11)

Adjudication

Channel S said it had withdrawn the TV ad when it received the complaint; it said it nevertheless believed the ad was acceptable.

1. Complaint not upheld

Mr Ahmed submitted a diploma from the British School of Yoga (BSY) to show that he had studied homeopathy.

The ASA noted the BSY diploma was awarded for a beginners' distance learning course. However, we understood that there were no specific regulatory requirements for homeopathic practitioners to have particular qualifications or be affiliated with a statutory body. Because Mr Ahmed was able to show that he had undertaken studies in homeopathy, we did not object on this point.

We investigated the TV ad under CAP (Broadcast) TV Advertising Standards Code rules 5.1 (Misleading Advertising) and 5.2.1 (Evidence) but did not find it in breach on this point.

We investigated the press ad under CAP Code clauses 3.1 (Substantiation) and 7.1 (Truthfulness) but did not find it in breach on this point.

2. Upheld

Mr Ahmed said he had medical training, not related to homeopathy, in his native country but was not registered with the General Medical Council to practise in the UK. He agreed to remove the prefix "Dr" from his advertising.

We were concerned that, by using the prefix "Dr", consumers could be misled into believing Mr Ahmed had a general medical qualification that allowed him to practise in the UK. We welcomed his assurance that he would remove "Dr" from his ads.

The TV ad breached CAP (Broadcast) TV Advertising Standards Code rules 5.1 (Misleading Advertising) and 8.1.2 (Impressions of professional advice and support) on this point.

The press ad breached CAP Code clause 50.6 (Health and beauty) on this point.

3. Upheld

Mr Ahmed agreed not to refer to the treatment of serious medical conditions in future ads.

We were concerned that, by making reference to serious medical conditions such as diabetes, asthma and liver disease in the press ad and claiming to cure complex and serious diseases in the TV ad, Mr Ahmed had implied homeopathic treatment was effective in treating those conditions; we were also concerned that the ads could discourage readers from seeking help from suitably qualified professionals. We told Mr Ahmed to remove references to serious medical conditions from his ads.

The TV ad breached CAP (Broadcast) Advertising Standards Code rules 8.2.6 (Conditions requiring medical attention), 8.2.7 (Self-diagnosis), 8.2.8 (Guarantee of efficacy) and 8.2.9 (Cure) on this point.

The press ad breached CAP Code clauses 3.1 (Substantiation), 50.3 and 50.19 (Health and beauty) on this point.

We welcomed Channel S's assurance that the ad had been withdrawn and told it not to air the ad again in its current form. We told Mr Ahmed to withdraw the press ad and to consult the CAP Copy Advice team before publishing future non-broadcast ads.