Holistic Claims

[Sgt Badass]

So, I'm going through the local advertising mag and there's an advert from an holistic company with the standad blurb, reiki, accu-crap etc. Then, in big bold letters:

"We specialise in treating cancer, stroke and heart disease patients and anxiety and stress."

Doesn't that fly in the face of the Cancer Act?

[FarSideOfTheMoon]

Yes, I'd advise sending a copy to your local trading standards. If it is in print, I'd say they should be more than interested.

[bindeweede]

So, I'm going through the local advertising mag and there's an advert from an holistic company with the standad blurb, reiki, accu-crap etc. Then, in big bold letters:

"We specialise in treating cancer, stroke and heart disease patients and anxiety and stress."

Doesn't that fly in the face of the Cancer Act?

Well, it would seem to.

Now, the Cancer Act was introduced to stop quackery at a time when just about any suggested cure was dubious or dangerous. It says,


No person shall take any part in the publication of any advertisement—
(a) containing an offer to treat any person for cancer, or to prescribe any remedy therefor, or to give any advice in connection with the treatment thereof.


http://www.quackometer.net/blog/2007/02/we-undersigned.html


An email to your local Trading Standards Office might be the next step.

And that bloody word "holistic" gives me a pain in my youknow!

Edit. Apologies, Farside. You got to reply just before I did. Same message, though.

[Sgt Badass]

Cheers, I'll be sending it to trading standards tomorrow. I wondered if the ASA would be interested too, might drop them a line.

[Mojo]

Definitely go for the ASA.

As far as the Cancer Act goes, note the weasel words (my emphasis): "We specialise in treating cancer, stroke and heart disease patients..." Not an offer to treat cancer, but to treat cancer patients. This may be enough to avoid prosecution under the Cancer Act.

[FarSideOfTheMoon]

Definitely go for the ASA.

As far as the Cancer Act goes, note the weasel words (my emphasis): "We specialise in treating cancer, stroke and heart disease patients..." Not an offer to treat cancer, but to treat cancer patients. This may be enough to avoid prosecution under the Cancer Act.

I think they are weasel words....but I've always thought the cancer act to be fairly inclusive, in that it effectively forbids any involvement in cancer treatment. At the very least, I expect TS would still want to contact the trader involved and explain to them where they are going wrong. Of course, once they remove the cancer reference, they can keep all the existing text quite legally. >:-)

[FarSideOfTheMoon]

So, I'm going through the local advertising mag and there's an advert from an holistic company with the standad blurb, reiki, accu-crap etc. Then, in big bold letters:

"We specialise in treating cancer, stroke and heart disease patients and anxiety and stress."

Doesn't that fly in the face of the Cancer Act?

Which company is it out of interest? Do they have an internet presence?

[Mojo]

I think they are weasel words....but I've always thought the cancer act to be fairly inclusive, in that it effectively forbids any involvement in cancer treatment. At the very least, I expect TS would still want to contact the trader involved and explain to them where they are going wrong. Of course, once they remove the cancer reference, they can keep all the existing text quite legally. >:-)
I think (NB: I am not a lawyer) that an advert offering to treat, for example, the side effects of chemotherapy in cancer patients might be legal. It might at least cast enough doubt for trading standards to be uncertain whether they'd be able to get a conviction.

[FarSideOfTheMoon]

I think (NB: I am not a lawyer) that an advert offering to treat, for example, the side effects of chemotherapy in cancer patients might be legal. It might at least cast enough doubt for trading standards to be uncertain whether they'd be able to get a conviction.

Agreed, but I'm not sure how many convictions they actually bring anyway. Previous searches have yielded a few successful prosecutions, but I believe (I am also not a lawyer....) that this act isn't automatically enabled, and TS have to get the council they work with to enable the legislation locally? That extra work, I imagine, would not be worthwhile unless they have a very good case.

[Julia]

It's ALWAYS worthwhile to report anything of this kind to Trading Standards. As we've discovered on BadPsychics, a phone call or visit from the TS people can be enough to make the woo merchants remove the offending words from their websites - the same probably applies to printed material. The lack of successful prosecutions may be due to the fact that a warning from TS makes further intervention unnecessary.

Anyway, keep us posted about what happens! O0

[Sgt Badass]

OK. Giving up on trading standards. Turns out my local one is based in Stoke and their website and helpline are just circular links to an empty room. When I regain the will to live, I'll try them again. They're not completely useless, if you've had your driveway done by a cowboy, they can sort you.

So, it's on to the ASA... I think they've got more teeth anyway.

[Sgt Badass]

Agreed, but I'm not sure how many convictions they actually bring anyway. Previous searches have yielded a few successful prosecutions, but I believe (I am also not a lawyer....) that this act isn't automatically enabled, and TS have to get the council they work with to enable the legislation locally? That extra work, I imagine, would not be worthwhile unless they have a very good case.

It seems very few. As someone else mentioned though, a call from the relevant authority should scare them a bit. As far as I know, the magazine this thing was in is also liable.

[FarSideOfTheMoon]

OK. Giving up on trading standards. Turns out my local one is based in Stoke and their website and helpline are just circular links to an empty room. When I regain the will to live, I'll try them again. They're not completely useless, if you've had your driveway done by a cowboy, they can sort you.

So, it's on to the ASA... I think they've got more teeth anyway.

You could try Consumer Direct - I think they are like a filter to Trading Standards. I certainly think TS hide their contact details a lot better than they used.

Or you could try putting your postcode in here:

http://www.tradingstandards.gov.uk/search/dbase/searchlocal.cfm

[Mojo]

So, it's on to the ASA... I think they've got more teeth anyway.
Unfortunately they don't have much in the way of teeth - pretty much the most they can do is is to tell the advertiser not to do it again. In extreme cases they might refer a persistent offender to the OFT, but it seems to take quite some time before they do this.

They do have a good approach to evidence though, and can require advertisers to prove their claims.