“Doctor recommended”

A “doctor recommended” claim is an express or implied statement that many doctors recommend the product for the particular use and audience the advertising shows or implies.1 Source: In the Matter of Abbott Laboratories, Complaint (FTC)

A buyer has no way to check what doctors actually say about a product, so a “doctor recommended” claim asks the buyer to accept the advertiser's word on a medical judgment. The duty to have a reasonable basis before making the claim exists so that the evidence comes first, and the allegations against Abbott Laboratories show the failure it prevents: according to the complaint, a survey that merely asked doctors to assume they would recommend a supplement for adults who were not ill, and then to pick a brand, was the support behind an advertised claim that many doctors recommend Ensure for healthy adults.4 Source: In the Matter of Abbott Laboratories, Complaint (FTC)

The statutory footing is general rather than specific to this phrase. Section 5(a) reaches deceptive acts or practices, and Section 12(a) adds a separate prohibition on false advertisements for foods, drugs, devices, services, or cosmetics.5 Source: Complaint for Permanent Injunction and Other Equitable Relief (DermaTend and Lipidryl), quoting 15 U.S.C. §§ 45(a), 52(a)

A stipulated order with Kirtan Patel and KP Commerce, LLC permanently restrains them from making, or assisting others in making, representations expressly or by implication, including through the use of a product name, endorsement, depiction, or illustration.17 Source: Stipulated Order for Permanent Injunction, Monetary Judgment, and Other Relief as to Kirtan Patel and KP Commerce, LLC, § III The covered representations include that a product or service is scientifically proven, clinically proven, or doctor recommended.18 Source: Stipulated Order for Permanent Injunction, Monetary Judgment, and Other Relief as to Kirtan Patel and KP Commerce, LLC, § III The same order also bars those defendants from advertising, marketing, promoting, offering for sale, or selling any good or service using the prohibited claims.19 Source: Stipulated Order for Permanent Injunction, Monetary Judgment, and Other Relief as to Kirtan Patel and KP Commerce, LLC, § II Beyond that, it bars them from operating any business that markets or sells through telemarketing or online advertising and makes health, wellness, or performance claims.20 Source: Stipulated Order for Permanent Injunction, Monetary Judgment, and Other Relief as to Kirtan Patel and KP Commerce, LLC, § II

Money is also at stake in federal court. In the Nobetes complaint, the FTC asked the court to award relief necessary to redress consumer injury, including rescission or reformation of contracts, restitution, the refund of monies paid, and the disgorgement of ill-gotten monies.21 Source: Nobetes Complaint for Permanent Injunction and Other Equitable Relief, Prayer for Relief That is a request in a complaint, not a result.

Orders can also impose recordkeeping that reaches survey evidence. One FTC order required the respondent to keep records for five years after the last dissemination of a covered representation.22 Source: In re Conopco, Inc., Decision and Order, 123 F.T.C. Those records had to include all tests, reports, studies, surveys, demonstrations or other evidence in its possession or control that contradict, qualify, or call into question the representation or the basis relied upon for it, including complaints from consumers.23 Source: In re Conopco, Inc., Decision and Order, 123 F.T.C.