Background
Summary of Council decision:
Three issues were investigated of all of which were Upheld.
Ad description
A website, happyspine.co.uk, for The Chiswick Chiropractic Clinic, featured text on the home page that stated "THE CHISWICK CHIROPRACTIC CLINIC CHIROPRACTIC - ACUPUNCTURE - MASSAGE Servicing and correcting spines since 1997". Further text stated "Dr Sykes, Chiropractor."
Text on the About Us page stated "Dr Jason Sykes BSc, DC. Chiropractor since 1996 The principle chiropractor and clinic owner is DR Jason Sykes BSc, DC. After graduating with a degree in Biology from the University of Surrey, Jason went to California to study for a his [sic] Doctor of Chiropractic degree. He graduated from LCC-W in 1996. And has been practising in Chiswick since 1997. Jason was fortunate in that his father was and still is a chiropractor. ‘I got a really good perspective, from an early age, on how chiropractic can turn peoples [sic] lives around and put them back on to the road of functioning fully’ He has a keen interest in structural correction of the spine. ie correcting posture distortions / displacements. (the cause of most back and neck pain) The technique used in the clinic is the most scientifically validated posture correction technique. It is called Chiropractic Biophysics (CBP) Jason continues to take postgraduate training courses in the USA and UK to be able to bring you the most up to date and efficient procedures. Jason is a member of the British Chiropractic Association and fully registered with the General Chiropractic Counci.".
Text on the "What Makes Us Different" page stated "People usually come to see us for one or more of the following reasons: Headaches Pins and Needles ... Sciatic Pain ... 'Patch care' or Correction care ? The technique we use is called CBP (Chiropractic Biophysics). It is a chiropractic technique that focuses on restoring the normal spinal shape (posture). CBP is a researched based technique which we feel offers the best method of reducing the chances of not only a recurrence of your discomfort but also reducing the rate of wear and tear. CBP is a corrective technique rather than just offering temporary pain relief ... * In some cases, although pain relief is usually possible, correction may not be. This is often the case if the spine has suffered too much degeneration. ** structural rehabilitation, as opposed to functional".
Issue
1. The complainant, a medical doctor, challenged whether the ad misleadingly implied that the advertiser was a medical doctor.
The complainant also challenged whether:
2. the claim "The technique used in the clinic is the most scientifically validated posture correction technique. It is called Chiropractic Biophysics (CBP)" was misleading and could be substantiated; and
3. the efficacy claims on the "What Makes Us Different page" were misleading and could be substantiated.
Response
1. The Chiswick Chiropractic Clinic believed the ad made clear that the term 'Doctor' was used to refer to the 'doctor of chiropractic degree' that Dr Sykes held. They said each reference to the term 'Doctor' was accompanied by the description 'chiropractor'. They said the title of the website made clear they were a chiropractic clinic. They also said Dr Sykes' biography made clear that his qualifications included a biology degree and a doctor of chiropractic degree.
2. The Chiswick Chiropractic Clinic said the technique had been referred to in 100 peer reviewed studies and articles. They provided a list of those studies and articles. They also said the technique was being taught in six chiropractic colleges in theUSA. They therefore believed the claim had been substantiated.
3. The Chiswick Chiropractic Clinic said the ad did not state that they could treat the conditions stated in the ad; rather they said it stated accurately the reasons that people visited the clinic. They acknowledged that they did not hold robust clinical evidence to demonstrate the efficacy of chiropractic services in treating sciatica or pins and needles. However, they argued that variations of those conditions were treated by chiropractors regularly.
Assessment
1. Upheld
The ASA noted the home page included text that stated "Dr Sykes, Chiropractor." We considered that readers were likely to infer from the reference to "Dr" that Dr Sykes held a general medical qualification.
The "About Us" page referred to Dr Skyes' study for his Doctor of Chiropractic degree, his membership of the British Chiropractic Association and his registration with the General Chiropractic Council. The page also included the text "DC", which we understood was a courtesy title meaning "doctor of chiropractic", beside Dr Sykes' title. We considered that information suggested that Dr Sykes held chiropractic qualifications. We nevertheless considered that, because the term "Dr" was also included on the "About Us" page, readers were likely to infer that Dr Sykes held a general medical qualification, as well as chiropractic qualifications.
Because we understood Dr Sykes did not hold a general medical qualification, we concluded that the use of the word "Dr" was likely to mislead. On that basis, we concluded that the ad breached the Code.
On this point, the ad breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 3.1 3.1 Marketing communications must not materially mislead or be likely to do so. (Misleading advertising), 3.7 3.7 Before distributing or submitting a marketing communication for publication, marketers must hold documentary evidence to prove claims that consumers are likely to regard as objective and that are capable of objective substantiation. The ASA may regard claims as misleading in the absence of adequate substantiation. (Substantiation).
2. Upheld
We considered consumers would understand the claim 'The technique used in the clinic is the most scientifically validated posture correction technique' to mean that a comprehensive review of all posture correction techniques had been conducted and concluded that CBP was considered the most effective. Whilst we noted the advertiser's comments that the technique had been referred to in 100 peer reviewed studies and articles and that the technique was being taught in six chiropractic colleges in the USA, we were concerned that we had not seen sufficient evidence to show that the technique was regarded as the most effective posture correction technique.
On that basis, we concluded that the claim had not been substantiated and therefore breached the Code.
On this point, the ad breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules
3.1
3.1
Marketing communications must not materially mislead or be likely to do so.
(Misleading advertising),
3.7
3.7
Before distributing or submitting a marketing communication for publication, marketers must hold documentary evidence to prove claims that consumers are likely to regard as objective and that are capable of objective substantiation. The ASA may regard claims as misleading in the absence of adequate substantiation.
(Substantiation) and
12.1
12.1
Objective claims must be backed by evidence, if relevant consisting of trials conducted on people. Substantiation will be assessed on the basis of the available scientific knowledge.
Medicinal or medical claims and indications may be made for a medicinal product that is licensed by the MHRA, VMD or under the auspices of the EMA, or for a CE-marked medical device. A medicinal claim is a claim that a product or its constituent(s) can be used with a view to making a medical diagnosis or can treat or prevent disease, including an injury, ailment or adverse condition, whether of body or mind, in human beings.
Secondary medicinal claims made for cosmetic products as defined in the appropriate European legislation must be backed by evidence. These are limited to any preventative action of the product and may not include claims to treat disease.
(Medicines, medical devices, health and beauty products).
3. Upheld
In the context of a website which offered chiropractic services, we considered consumers would understand the claim 'People usually come to see us for one or more of the following reasons' and subsequent reference to medical conditions to mean that the advertiser could treat those conditions. We noted CAP had seen evidence to demonstrate that chiropractors could treat headaches arising from the neck. However, we considered consumers would understand the reference to 'headaches' to mean that the advertiser could treat headaches in general. Because we had seen no evidence to demonstrate that and because we had seen no evidence to demonstrate the efficacy of chiropractic services in treating sciatica or pins and needles, we concluded that the claims had not been substantiated and therefore breached the Code.
On this point, the ad breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules
3.1
3.1
Marketing communications must not materially mislead or be likely to do so.
(Misleading advertising),
3.7
3.7
Before distributing or submitting a marketing communication for publication, marketers must hold documentary evidence to prove claims that consumers are likely to regard as objective and that are capable of objective substantiation. The ASA may regard claims as misleading in the absence of adequate substantiation.
(Substantiation) and
12.1
12.1
Objective claims must be backed by evidence, if relevant consisting of trials conducted on people. Substantiation will be assessed on the basis of the available scientific knowledge.
Medicinal or medical claims and indications may be made for a medicinal product that is licensed by the MHRA, VMD or under the auspices of the EMA, or for a CE-marked medical device. A medicinal claim is a claim that a product or its constituent(s) can be used with a view to making a medical diagnosis or can treat or prevent disease, including an injury, ailment or adverse condition, whether of body or mind, in human beings.
Secondary medicinal claims made for cosmetic products as defined in the appropriate European legislation must be backed by evidence. These are limited to any preventative action of the product and may not include claims to treat disease.
(Medicines, medical devices, health and beauty products).
Action
The ad must not appear again in its current form. We told the Chiswick Chiropractic Clinic to ensure future ads made clear that Dr Sykes was not a medically qualified doctor. We also told the Chiswick Chiropractic Clinic to ensure they held robust documentary evidence to support claims in future.
