Advertisment
Under the services provided tab on the website, one of the services advertised was a ‘BOTOX CLINIC’.
An image of a woman lying down wearing a hairnet also featured. A syringe was held to the side of the woman’s forehead by a person wearing pink latex gloves. The text underneath the image read:
“Botox Clinic”.
Complaint
The advertising content came to the attention of the ASA via its monitoring programme.
The ASA Executive challenged whether the references to ‘Botox’ and ‘Botulinum toxin’ were compliant with the Code requirement that prescription only medicines may not be advertised to the public.
Response
The advertisers initially failed to provide a response. On receipt of the draft adjudication, they said their website manager had been asked to remove all references to Botox from the website.
Conclusion
Complaint upheld.
The Complaints Council expressed concern at the advertisers’ delay responding to the ASA’s correspondence. They noted that the advertising had been amended at the time of adjudication.
The Council noted the initial advertisement had promoted a treatment using a prescription only medicine (‘Botox’), and that the Code required that “Prescription-only medicines may not be advertised to the public”.
In view of the fact that a prescription only medicine was advertised and in light of the delay in responding by the advertisers, the Council concluded that the advertisement was in breach of Code Sections 3.10 and 11.16.
Action Required:
As the advertising had been amended, no further action was required.
The Council reminded the advertisers that the adjudication applied to all media.
