OO complaint led to multiple being fined

Boots Opticians' laser eye publicity was found to be in breach of the profession's publicity rules last week. A complaint brought by an independent optometrist based in Yorkshire led to the multiple being fined for its promotional material. The optometrist, Andrew Thornton said: 'I am pleased the General Optical Council has vindicated my complaint as did the Advertising Standards Authority. I look forward to more realistic promotion of laser eye surgery in the future.' Details of the charges brought against the company, which has just sold on its laser eye business to Optical Express, were published in last week's optician (News, November 12). At a hearing of the GOC's disciplinary committee the subsidiary of the Nottingham-based plc was accused of breaching 3 (b) of the Council's rules on publicity 1985, by using a means of giving publicity to its business which made a claim not capable of substantiation. Between May 31 and July 1, 2001 the company published a leaflet entitled 'Boots Opticians: Your guide to Laser eye surgery' which contained two statements: 'throw away your glasses and contact lenses. For good' and 'Look forward to a future without glasses or contact lenses.' Although the company agreed the phrases were published, they maintained the brochure should be considered as a whole. David O'Brart, consultant ophthalmic surgeon and expert witness for the GOC said the words complained of had been 'misleading', stating: 'It's untrue all patients would be able to throw away their glasses.' Most people aged 40-50 would still need reading glasses, he added, and 'we don't know whether laser is permanent for 10 years, let alone 20 years. There's no way of knowing.' Sarah Bayliss, a commercial manager for laser eye correction within Boots Opticians, said that following 255 patients treated at the Regent Street clinic in London, 251 did not need glasses Ð 98 per cent Ð and two required them at a lesser strength. Discussions took place which would have indicated 'the likely degree of success' and the consent form would have shown that results were 'not guaranteed'. She said it would have indicated spectacles might be needed and that it did not prevent them being required between the ages of 40 and 50. Bayliss said the complaint by the ASA had been upheld and they had removed the words 'For good' before producing a new brochure which was given ASA approval. Finding the company guilty, chair of the disciplinary committee Heather Wilcox said: 'We consider the claims promise a long term, if not permanent, solution. We are satisfied the claims were not capable of substantiation at the time.' A fine of £1,600 payable within 28 days was announced.