Banning Cosmetic Surgery Advertising - Good Idea or Bad?

I am a tad confused today.

I sit here trying to understand why I am a bit miffed on the call to ban Cosmetic Surgery advertising, and I think it comes back to a couple of simple points; it's unfair, unnecessary and ultimately pointless.

It wouldn't have made any difference to the current situation; the French have not been able to advertise Cosmetic Procedures to the public for years - but it didn't stop PIP manufacturing poor quality implants.

Let's wind back to what we are trying to achieve; a safer, more transparent industry with greater protection for patients. I agree that the way Cosmetic Surgery has been sensationalised in the media and the way it is often positioned to a prospective patient is inappropriate for a surgical procedure. The Groupon offers and 2 for 1 deals are just utterly ridiculous and should never have got passed by Advertising Standards.

I have spoken to a few of my Creative, Advertising and and Marketing colleagues and we agree (unusually) on one thing ;

A ban all advertising of the procedures will backfire, as it will remove the legitimate channels for informing patients, and probably lead to MORE instances of poor practice, due to the lack of available information for patients.

And there is a question over whether they're patients, clients or consumers? I would argue all three at one time or another; Consumer when they are looking for information, Client in the consultation and Patient thereafter. This is the problem of having an FMCG model in Medicine, and also now trying to get the genie back inside the bottle.

The results of Cosmetic Surgery are EVERYWHERE, and Boob Jobs are getting more press now that ever before. You can't suddenly erase 10 years of market conditioning by banning advertising of a product or procedure while the market still continues to stare at enhanced celebs on TV,covet them, and go onto the SoFeminine forums and discuss.

Which would you rather have, a process of communicating legitimate information to a prospective patient that can be reviewed, edited and regulated, or nothing at all and rely on heresay, myth and pseudoscience?

This is the issue with Botox; the most widely known Cosmetic procedure, that no-one knows what it is because it cannot be advertised, discussed or even looked at invitingly by manufacturers to patients. So you rely on the practioner to position it appropriately, and ensure that the patient is informed on the product. Now does that patient leave the consultation fully informed? Maybe, maybe not,  but if it was advertised they would have an idea of what to expect and what questions to ask.

The large Surgical Chains have made some horrendous errors of judgement, and rightly should be castigated for it; but this also has the feel of an attempted market share land grab. If you remove the big guns ability to advertise their procedures you reduce their power, but who will then give the patient the information they need? 

Where do they get this information from, are those calling for the banning of advertising going to fund a patient awareness campaign? Probably not, and good luck getting the Government and Suppliers to cough up for it! 

The industry has recently been lauding the FDA and US regulatory authorities as the bastions of good sense in the way they deal with regulation and product approvals, and yet in the US, BOTOX is advertised directly to patients. Is it now wrong to focus on improving the safeguards at point of entry, and focus on something that would be a nightmare to police and only really be effective if it was across both Surgical and Non Surgical procedures.

The issue is not the MEDIUM, the issue is the MESSAGE, and the Advertising Standards Agency are responsible for this. Recently I believe that Spire Healthcare were asked to remove an ad that appeared to trivialise a Cosmetic procedure, so the process obviously works and nothing would give me more entertainment than watching clinics grass each other up to the ASA.

Don't get me wrong, I think the BAAPS 6 Point plan is a great idea, and I support the intention wholeheartedly, however in my experience people can only really focus on 3 things well and only one will get any real attention.

I simply don't believe that banning advertising of cosmetic procedures will address any real need, and this discussion has diverted focus from the real issue which is the quality of the product that was implanted in 40,000 women in the UK. There is also a restraint of trade issue in this that needs to be looked at, has anyone even asked a lawyer if it is actually legal to do this?

So, in Marketing speak;  let's focus on the real issue (Product) and not get sidetracked into Placement and Positioning and let the ASA take up the slack in ensuring that the messages to the patient (Promotion) are ethical, legal, truthful and honest.

What do the ladies who have had the PIP implants think of banning ads? I bet they would want a quality result, from a Quality surgeon using a Quality implant and not really care about whether they read about it in Grazia.