Radio Advertising, 'M.D.' Title, and a Prepaid Asthma Package
A Pennsylvania chiropractor runs a radio advertisement: 'The only board-certified spinal correction specialist in the region. We guarantee a 90% cure rate for sciatica in 30 days or your money back. We also correct subluxations that cause asthma, diabetes, and ear infections. Ask about our MD-approved protocol.' His business card reads 'Dr. Alan Smith, D.C., M.D.' He does not hold an MD; he received an honorary doctorate from an unaccredited online school. He sells prepaid treatment packages through a daily-deal website and states 'no refunds after purchase.' A patient who bought a $900 package for asthma complains to the Board after no improvement. The ad includes before-and-after X-ray images and a testimonial from a patient who says she stopped insulin. The chiropractor says the First Amendment protects the ad.
1. Evaluate each advertising claim under the Board's regulations and Act 188. Which claims are permissible and which are not?
Read the worked answer
Commercial speech is protected but not absolutely; the Board may regulate false or misleading professional advertising. 'Board-certified spinal correction specialist' is misleading unless it identifies a recognized certifying body and the chiropractor actually holds that certification. The state Board certifies adjunctive procedures, not a 'spinal correction specialty.' A guaranteed 90% cure rate is a guarantee of cure and is prohibited. Claiming to correct subluxations that cause asthma, diabetes, and ear infections goes beyond the chiropractic scope and is misleading because those are systemic diseases requiring medical management. 'MD-approved protocol' is vague and implies physician endorsement that must be substantiated. The before-and-after X-rays and the insulin testimonial imply disease treatment and a medication outcome, which is especially dangerous. Conclusion: most of the ad violates the Board's advertising and unprofessional-conduct rules; the First Amendment does not protect false or misleading commercial claims.
2. Analyze the use of 'M.D.' and the honorary doctorate on the business card. What are the professional-identification issues?
Read the worked answer
Using 'M.D.' when the chiropractor does not hold a medical license is false and misleading. A chiropractor may use 'Dr.' with the chiropractic degree and must identify the profession accurately, but may not imply a medical degree or medical licensure. An honorary doctorate from an unaccredited online school does not create an MD or authorize medical practice, and listing it as 'M.D.' would deceive patients. The Board's professional-identification rules exist so patients can tell who is licensed to do what. The fact that the chiropractor calls it honorary does not cure the misrepresentation on a business card. Conclusion: the card should be corrected to show only the actual degree and license, without 'M.D.' or misleading honorary credentials.
3. What issues arise from the $900 prepaid asthma package, the 'no refunds' term, and the patient testimonial?
Read the worked answer
The prepaid package raises informed-consent, advertising, and financial-exploitation issues. The chiropractor must disclose the terms, the absence of a guarantee, the refund policy, and the fact that chiropractic is not established treatment for asthma. A 'no refunds' clause does not insulate misleading inducements, and the Board may view a $900 package sold for an out-of-scope condition as unprofessional conduct. The patient testimonial implying that insulin was stopped is dangerous and misleading; the Board may require substantiation and may treat it as encouraging patients to abandon medical care. The chiropractor should refund unused services or resolve the complaint fairly, correct the ad, and refer the asthma patient to her physician. Conclusion: the package and testimonial compound the advertising violations and create a risk of discipline for false advertising, scope violations, and financial exploitation.