Miselading copy and ad in spa magazine

Hair Removal Information Sources News
#1

A reader sent a couple of clippings form American Spa Magazine’s May 2007 issue. “Getting Equipped” by Nicole Palmieri describes the Prowave from Cutera as a system that “removes hair permanently.” FDA has not cleared these devices to use the term “permanent hair removal.” Many devices are allowed to make claims of permanent hair reduction.

An ad for Biojouvance in the same magazine lists the Europro IPL as “pain free and no lasting discomfort.” No hair removal device is cleared by FDA to make claims of pain-free treatment. Such a claim is considered misbranding and adulteration.

#2

It is time consumers get wise. Publishers of Magazines make MONEY from ADERTISEMENTS, therefore, they will say ANYTHING as long as the advertisers buy space for an ad. When you see an ad or get a mailed coupon that says," AS ADVERTISED IN BLAH BLAH BLAH ETC,… IT ONLY MEANS THEY ARE SUPPORTING THE ADVERTISER regardless of what he says and they do not care because they got an ad.
Ethics be DAMNED … are you going to advertise with us? Then you see ads that say …"AS advertised in TIME, VOGUE, VANITY FAIR ETC. Publishers, radio, and TV all say we’re not capable of understanding all the things we accept for ads, and we can not check them all. We rely on the advertiser to tell the truth. HA HA HA HA.

That is why you see an ad for a different diet each month. Even OPRAH and her magazine do it. I saw a DIET ad in OPRAH for strawberries dipped in chocolate. Isn’t that great. Eat these until you get sick and can’t eat any more. That will lose weight or DOUBLE your fat bak. THE PHONY COSMETIC ADS ARE A BIG JOKE TOO. How about the BEST DOCTORS list. These docs advertise their services without knowing what their operator is doing because he/she is never present to supervise as is required by FDA. WE ARE OFFICIALLY A SOCIETY OF SCREWERS AND SCREWEES. GOOD LUCK.

#3

Ophrah’s magazine is a special thorn in my butt. One of her reporters interviewed then Executive Director of The AEA and then followed every one of her quotes with a snide remark that negated every word, and basically called the woman a liar. The sum effect of the article was to say that one should do LASER without every bothering to try Electrolysis, with the unsaid thing that, if LASER did not do the job for you, then you simply could not be helped.

Totally bought and paid for perspective. If the AEA had a full page ad in the mag that month, they would have gotten better, more balanced treatment. If they had TWO full page ads, it would have said never do LASER, only go to decent electrologists!