The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) recently ruled against Therapie Clinic UK following complaints from the Joint Council for Cosmetic Practitioners (JCCP) and Laser Clinics UK about a paid-for Facebook advertisement promoting "Cosmetic Injections." The ASA concluded that the advertisement breached the CAP Code by indirectly promoting Botox, a prescription-only medicine (POM), to the public.

Ad details

The Facebook ad, seen on 8 July 2024, highlighted "Cosmetic Injections" with claims such as:

- “200+ Doctors on Our Team”

- “10 Million+ Treatments Completed”

- “Doctor Led Treatments Cosmetic Injections 3 Areas”

The ad also mentioned treatments like dermal fillers, lip fillers, and other aesthetic procedures. Accompanying imagery of a woman’s face further emphasised the focus on cosmetic enhancements.

The complaints

The JCCP and Laser Clinics UK challenged the advertisement, arguing that it indirectly promoted Botox, a POM, by referring to "Cosmetic Injections." Under the CAP Code, advertising POMs directly or indirectly to the public is prohibited.

Therapie Clinic’s response

Therapie Clinic UK, operated by Valterous Ltd, stated that all their treatments were “Doctor-Led” and carried out by qualified healthcare professionals. These included non-prescription treatments such as dermal fillers and polynucleotides, alongside POM treatments like botulinum toxin (Botox). They clarified that:

- “3 Areas” referred to specific zones for aesthetic treatments (e.g., lips, cheeks, and chin for fillers, or face and neck for polynucleotides).

- “Cosmetic Injections” encompassed a broad range of treatments, including POM and non-POM procedures.

Therapie Clinic argued that the ad complied with legal requirements as it did not explicitly mention botulinum toxin.

ASA’s assessment

The ASA investigated the claims and reviewed Therapie Clinic’s website. It determined that:

- The term "Anti-Wrinkle Injections" was synonymous with botulinum toxin treatments.

- The ad promoted “Cosmetic Injections 3 Areas from £179,” which consumers would associate with anti-wrinkle treatments rather than other non-POM procedures listed.

- Despite avoiding explicit mention of Botox, the ad indirectly advertised a POM by referring to treatments that predominantly included botulinum toxin injections.

Under the CAP Code (Edition 12, Rule 12.12), advertising POMs to the public is prohibited.

Outcome and action

The ASA upheld the complaints, concluding that the ad breached advertising regulations by promoting Botox indirectly. It instructed Therapie Clinic UK to:

1. Remove the ad in its current form.

2. Avoid promoting prescription-only medicines, either directly or indirectly, in future advertisements.

Implications for the sector

This ruling serves as a reminder to all clinics offering medical aesthetic treatments to ensure their marketing complies with strict advertising regulations. The JCCP encourages providers to prioritise ethical advertising practices, ensuring clarity and adherence to the CAP Code to maintain public trust in the medical aesthetics sector.

By identifying and challenging misleading or non-compliant advertising, the JCCP ensures that clinics operate transparently and responsibly, helping to protect consumers from potentially unethical practices.

The JCCP’s work directly supports the enforcement of advertising regulations, ensuring that promotional materials align with the CAP Code and uphold the law. This contributes to a safer and more professional industry, where public welfare is prioritised over aggressive marketing tactics.

For further guidance on advertising in this field, visit the ASA’s official website.