The current FTC Guides state that “endorsers qualifications must in fact give the endorser the expertise that the endorser is represented as possessing with respect to the endorsement.” The proposed modification of an illustrative example in the Guides implies that an endorser of a hearing aid should not be referred to as “Doctor” as this implies that the endorser is a medical doctor. The text goes on to note that “a non-medical doctor” (e.g., an individual with a Ph.D. in audiology) might be able to endorse the product if the advertisement discloses the nature and limits of the endorser’s experience.
The Academy comments highlight current educational training and scope of practice for audiology in all 50 states and references the 2022 Academy Position Statement that supports the use of the title “doctor” for members who have earned doctoral degrees from accredited institutions, with the provision that the audiologist provide clarification as to which field they hold their doctorate. The Academy letter requests that this illustrative example be amended to reflect this clarification.
Recent Posts
Appropriations Update
As Congress returns from the August recess, its primary goal is to pass the appropriations bills that fund the federal government by September 30, 2025….
Clinical Decision Support for Vestibular Diagnosis: Large-Scale Machine Learning with Lived Experience Coaching
Pastor et al. (2025) developed a machine learning system (MLS) to help make a vestibular diagnosis based on patient symptoms. They utilized diagnostic data from…
Academy Submits Comments on Proposed Revisions to MPFS CY 2026
In response to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) regarding revisions to Medicare payment policies under the Medicare…