Ad description
A website for opticians PANOPTICA, www.panoptica.co.uk, seen on 19 May 2023, featured a page titled “Chromagen. EXTRA HELP” that stated “Chromagen lenses are a series of coloured filters initially created to help with colour blindness and then further developed to treat dyslexia and specific learning difficulties […] The prescription is based on a series of tests which usually take around 3 hours – including time in the consulting room and time trialing [sic] the filters. However, this doesn’t have to take place in one go but can be spread over a number of visits to match the patient’s needs […]”.
Another page titled “Dyslexia. A NEW LOOK” stated “Since starting to use Chromagen lenses we have achieved remarkable success for patients with specific learning difficulties or dyslexia, particularly children. However, it’s not a cure online case study help [sic] all treatment for every dyslexic. The results can be variable and for some dyslexics, no improvements at all are made. In our experience, it works very well for around 7 in 10 of our patients […] We’ve treated a large number of children now and are very pleased with the results […] The tests are undertaken at the child’s pace and we can essay writer [sic] spread the work over several visits as necessary […] Results are not always immediate but over the first few weeks marked improvements in reading accuracy, fluency and speed are achieved. A study of over 400 dyslexic children, found that over 90% reported a significant improvement in reading, writing and comprehension levels when wearing Chromagen lenses”.
Issue
The complainant, a specialist dyslexia teacher, who understood that dyslexia was a learning difficulty and was not caused by visual difficulties, challenged whether the efficacy claims for the advertised lenses to treat dyslexia were misleading and could be substantiated.
Response
MH Optical Ltd t/a PANOPTICA said they had amended the ad.
Assessment
Upheld
We considered consumers would have understood the claims “developed to treat dyslexia and specific learning difficulties”, “we have achieved remarkable success for patients with specific learning difficulties or dyslexia, particularly children”, “works well for around 7 in 10 of our patients”, “marked improvements in reading accuracy, fluency and speed are achieved”, and “A study of over 400 dyslexic children, found that over 90% reported a significant improvement in reading, writing and comprehension levels when wearing Chromagen lenses” to mean Chromagen lenses could be used to treat dyslexia, including dyslexia in children, and that they could improve reading and writing ability in those with dyslexia. While we welcomed PANOPTICA's assurance that the ad had been amended, we had received no evidence from them to substantiate the claims as they appeared to the complainant. In the absence of such evidence, we concluded the claims had not been substantiated and were therefore misleading.
The ad breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 3.1 (Misleading advertising), 3.7 (Substantiation), and 12.1 (Medicines, medical devices, health-related products and beauty products).
Action
The ad must not appear again in the form complained of. We told MH Optical Ltd Opticians t/a PANOPTICA to ensure their future ads did not claim their products could treat dyslexia.
