This blog is Nick Kemp's personal opinions, observations and insights as a therapist, coach and trainer. Any opinions are not medical advice and are presented for information and entertainment. Please read the rest of the site to find out how Nick works with his clients to bring about positive change for many conditions including: stress, fear, anxiety and anger related issues.
More on Advertising Standards for NLP and Therapy
Thursday 30th June 2011
 A while ago I blogged on the implications of Advertising Standards now treating websites as “adverts” Personally I’m in favour of truthful advertising and I have regularly lamented some of the quite ludicrous claims made in the world of NLP and Changework. Many NLP trainers and practitioners are unaware of the implications of ASA policy and continue to advertise “treatments” for what the ASA consider as “medical problems” Such problems include OCD, Anorexia, Bulimia, Addictions and many other issues. Even mentioning these conditions on a website is deemed to be offering treatments that should instead be dealt with by “medical professionals” Despite the fact that many practitioners have success with these conditions, the suggestion from the ASA is that there needs to be “statistical evidence” and “studies” before any such assistance is offered. There is also a worrying trend of individuals using ASA regulations for business positioning and complaining about therapists and products purely for financial commercial advantage. Groups like The Nightingale Collaboration actively encourage “skeptics” to make complaints about websites to support their own agenda. Each month they take pride in targeting a complimentary therapy industry with a “focus for the month” campaign and to date have targeted homeopathy and cranial sacral therapy. A Google search quickly reveals that the members of this group appear to have a questionable agenda and one can only wonder why one of the directors is alleged to have made literally hundreds of complaints about chiropractors! It’s relatively easy for any member of the public to make a complaint to the ASA and the complainer remains anonymous and the onus is on the therapist to provide evidence for claims made. On the surface this can all seem totally reasonable, but as with all law creating, the more rules that are created, the more “criminals” are also created. It’s important to remember that the ASA deal with all advertising standards and essentially have a check list of what is deemed acceptable, with little or no awareness of how NLP or therapy works. Unfortunately in the world of NLP more than ever the claims made for trainings and products have become ever more ludicrous which increases the likelihood that the whole field will receive attention from the ASA. In some respects this could be a good thing as many NLP institutes and businesses create a terrible image for the field. Many trainers and practitioners can be quite naïve and believe fully what they are told on courses which can create potential problems for them from an ASA perspective. The wording of content on websites is one of the main preoccupations of the ASA and its deemed inappropriate to use the term “cures” in relation to any service and even if a client freely offers a testimonial suggesting that they are “cured” this is also considered unacceptable. This does for me beg the question that if the client is not able to determine if they are cured, then who might be then able to do so? |
Posted by Nick Kemp at 09:18
Nick Kemp Blog Feed
Fred Lunjevich
4th July 2011 at 06:58
I have followed your work for sometime and noted that you have a very pragmatic approach (indeed your post refers to this stance).
You are right - many claims by NLPers have been exaggerated to be absurd and this blights the rest of the practitioners who are more grounded in their claims. This is precisely why scrutiny is absolutely needed in complementary and alternative circles - unbounded by the responsibility to submit to the evidence practitioners can claim what they please.
What the ASA is more concerned with is process - we don't care what your claim is, we only care that it is supported by verifiable, repeatable evidence. Any effect that can be subjectively accounted for can be controlled and tested objectively.
Homeopathy and alternative/complementary modalities make medical claims, therefore... those claims need to be subjected to scientific testing.
I also want to point out that the role skeptics, scientists and indeed the Nightingale collaboration play in this a public service one. The media have proven to be largely incapable of informing the public to beware of practices and supplements that are proven to be false.
The skeptical agenda is about keeping claims real - your portrayal of the skeptical community seems to be that we are smug naysayers. All we ask is that claims to effectiveness of modalities be in proportioned to the evidence. Is that really asking too much?
People who make claims that are supported by evidence have nothing to be afraid of.
You can blame tighter restrictions at the ASA on chiropractors and their failed lawsuit against Simon Singh - a man who merely pointed out the fact that many chiropractors make bogus claims about the effectiveness of chiropractic interventions.
Homoeopathy and cranial sacral therapy are modalities both don't work and the mechanism proposed by proponents is nonsense. This fact deserves to be brought to the attention of the ASA.
NLP is a slippery fish in that many of the claims are vague, non-specific and subjective. In that respect, some NLP techniques are fine because, like psychotherapies, they work within the malleability of conscious experience.
The unjustified leap that practitioners often make is equating what takes place in the mind with physiological effects. That the mind-body connection exploited by today's "quantum healers" like Deepak Chopra is a legitimate way to cure health problems.
"CURE"
Regulators have become increasingly sensitive to the word "cure" due to the large number of unsubstantiated claims to cures
for all kinds of ailments, especially those relating to cancers. Most of the claims with "cure" in them come from
scientifically discredited modalities. The public absolutely needs to be on guard from these kinds of extravagant claims by internet charlatans. Stories about desparate peopel abandoning their cancer treatment and associated medication on the advice of a quack practitioner. At present these people are largely accountable to no one for harmful advice.
Testimonials cannot be sufficient evidence of a cure. Anecdotes on websites are more often than not used as the sole evidence that a modality works. Anecdotes are good for marketing and describing the person's experience with said practitioner - not as definitive evidence something works (which is mostly how testimonials are used).
Anyway, taking away as many loopholes as possible from people making extravagant claims can only benefit a practitioner such as yourself who seeks to provide evidence-based therapy.
Nick Kemp
4th July 2011 at 07:36
Thanks for the feedback
My experience is that homeopathy is actually highly effective!
As for the Nightingale group, a bit of digging suggests to me that they have their own agenda and although I am in favour of sensible verifiable claims after some research I personally think these are a pretty unpleasant group...
Fred Lunjevich
4th July 2011 at 10:26
Well, no offense intended but if you think Homeopathy has any value beyond a placebo then this kinda confirms why the ASA has to vet such therapies. At the end of the day, what we think is effective is subject to all kinds of biases and reasoning flaws. When the science is in (and is) then we ought change our minds.
Best of luck.
Fred the happy skeptic
Nick Kemp
4th July 2011 at 15:05
As someone who has used homeopathy for 30 years I have enough evidence that it's not placebo
As for the ASA vetting, well they are check ad copy and have no therapeutic insights. I could write a lengthy post about the absurdity of many ASA deductions, but don't really have time at present! Warm regards and thanks for feedback
Nick
Add a new comment
Existing user
New user sign up