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
CMS Sets Medically Unlikely Edit for Key Audiology Codes
The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) has established a Medically Unlikely Edit (MUE) of two units per date of service for Current Procedural Terminology (CPT®) codes 92629, 92632,…
Allergies in U.S. Adults
Individuals who live in colder areas of the country may be eagerly awaiting the arrival of spring and its associated warmer weather. Others may be…
Securing Federal Loan Access for Audiology Students: Comments Close March 2
The Academy is pursuing a two-pronged strategy through Congress and the Department of Education to protect federal student loan access for AuD students. Both pathways…


