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
The Hum
In the early 1970s, humans around the globe began reporting a persistent, low frequency (30-80 Hz) noise and dubbed it “The Hum”. While there are…
Exploring the Impact of Tinnitus on Work Productivity
Over 50 million people in the United States experience tinnitus; nearly half of those individuals struggle with it, and some even perceive it as debilitating (American Tinnitus…
Federal Judge Blocks Key Portion of Student Loan Rule: Department Includes Professional Degree Status for Audiology Programs
Audiology students received an important, though temporary, victory after a federal court blocked a key provision of the U.S. Department of Education’s new student loan…



