Bill Sohan the kind-hearted animal healer

I had an early success in my sceptical letter writing career with Bill Sohan, a distance healer.

(Image credit)

Of course, at that time, I didn't know about the Veterinary Surgeons Act 1966 which prohibits anyone besides vets (and a few related groups) from treating animals.

Perhaps Bill didn't know either, so in order to prevent him from potentially committing an offence, here's another ASA complaint about his latest advert.

"I write to complain about an advert appearing in "Nexus" magazine (August-September 2010, Vol 17 No 5, p76).

The advert, for Bill Sohan, promotes an animal healing service.

I suspect that the advert may be in breach of four sections of the British Code of Advertising, Sales Promotion and Direct Marketing (CAP) code. I can provide an original copy of the adverts by post, if required.

1. The advert includes the text:

"SPIRITUAL HEALING. Humans / Animals. No fees..."

2. The advertised website[1] lists[2] the Bill Sohan's qualifications. It does not appear that he is a veterinarian.

3. According to The Royal College of Veterinary Science [3]:

"The Veterinary Surgeons Act 1966 (Section 19) provides, subject to a number of exceptions, that only registered members of the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons may practise veterinary surgery. 'Veterinary surgery' is defined within the Act as encompassing the 'art and science of veterinary surgery and medicine' which includes the diagnosis of diseases and injuries in animals, tests performed on animals for diagnostic purposes, advice based upon a diagnosis and surgical operations which may not necessarily form part of a treatment. These restrictions are in the interests of ensuring that animals are treated only by people qualified to do so."

4. (i) Under Section 4.1 of the CAP Code, I challenge whether the advertisers have complied with their "primary responsibility for ensuring that their marketing communications are legal" in relation to their animal healing service.

(ii) Under Section 2.2, I challenge whether the advert has been "prepared with a sense of responsibility to consumers and to society".

(iii) Under Section 6.1, I challenge whether the advert exploits the "credulity, lack of knowledge or inexperience of consumers" by not mentioning that, under the Act, only registered veterinarians can treat animals.

(iv) Under Section 7.1, I challenge whether the advert is likely to mislead by omission of any mention of the Veterinary Surgeons Act 1966.

5. I confirm that I have no connections with the advertiser or the magazine. I confirm that I am not involved in legal proceedings with the advertiser or the magazine.

Footnotes:
[1] http://www.billlynneharry.co.uk/
[2] http://www.billlynneharry.co.uk/faqs/how-qualifiedexperienced-are-you-to-do-this-kind-of-work-i-am-quite-sceptic-as-i-know-there-are-charlatans-in-this-field
[3] http://www.rcvs.org.uk/Templates/Internal.asp?NodeID=92572&int2ndParentNodeID=89737&int1stParentNodeID=89642#students
"

Nominet UK - my new penpal

Have you ever wondered what sceptics do on a Saturday evening?

Yes, so have I.

Wherever they went tonight, they didn't invite me along, so I've had time for another complaint-a-thon.

Nominet is the body which "registers" all UK websites whose URLs end with .co.uk

Non-trading individuals are allowed to opt out of having their names and addresses on display for all the world to see, but that privilege doesn't apply to professionals.

An anonymous contributor recently pointed out that Michele Knight had incorrectly opted out. I'm delighted to say that, having been informed, she quickly corrected her mistake.

It got me thinking, though - how many of the woos featuring on this site have also "forgotten" to comply with Nominet's regulations?

(Image credit - this isn't a real form)

The answer is four. And here they are!

UPDATE, 12 Apr: Nominet took all of fifty-two minutes to investigate all four complaints. They reply "[we] have issued notice to the registrant and registrar that the address details for the domain name will be opted in to the WHOIS unless changes are made so that the domain name meets the opt-out criteria." Hats off to Nominet!

Bill Sohan (see my original complaint)

"Bill Sohan uses this site to promote his 'Psychic Readings' service.
Readings are provided by post, and in person.
The site does not list fees, but asks for 'Contributions)'
(see http://www.billlynneharry.co.uk/faqs/how-do-you-support-yourself-then)
Paid advertisements for the service have appeared in "Nexus" magazine"

Vanessa Jones (see my original complaint)

"Vanessa Jones uses this site to promote her commercial "reflexology" healing service. The site lists her fees (http://www.reflexologybyvanessa.co.uk/prices.php)"

Liz Levelle (see my original complaint)

"Liz Levelle uses this site to promote her services as a homeopath and a naturopath.
The site list her fee as £90 per hour.
Paid advertisements for her services have appeared in "Kindred Spirit" magazine."

'Geoffrey Ronning' (see my original complaint)

"This site promotes a miracle weight-loss cure.
The package sells for £69."

The next time you visit a pseudoscientific or supernatural practicioner at a .co.uk address, don't forget to check that they've revealed their name and address.

If they haven't, here's the form to help them rectify their "error"!

*Bill Sohan - healing by post

Bill Sohan advertises his services in Nexus Magazine, claiming that he can heal people and animals at a distance.

UPDATE, 4th May: ASA report " The advertiser has provided a written assurance that the ad will be amended to remove the reference to 'DISTANT … ' healing."

(Image credit)

His website helpfully clarifies that, although the service is free, "contributions of any size are most gratefully received. Cheques should be made payable to P.Sohan (and not Bill Sohan)."

Standard ASA complaint follows.

"I write to complain about an advert published in Nexus Magazine, Vol. 17, No. 2 (February-March 2010).

The advert, for Bill Sohan, is entitled "DISTANT HEALING".

I have submitted a scan of the advert. I can provide an original copy of the advert by post, if required.

I suspect that the advert is in breach of two sections of the British Code of Advertising, Sales Promotion and Direct Marketing (CAP) code.

1. Nexus Magazine is published in the UK "under licence by Nexus Magazine (UK) Ltd". It is available in high street shops like WH Smiths.

2. The February-March 2010 issue (Vol. 17, No. 2, page 77) carried a classified advert entitled "DISTANT HEALING". The advert promotes a healing-by-post service.

3. The CAP Code, Section 3.1, states "Before distributing or submitting a marketing communication for publication, marketers must hold documentary evidence to prove all claims, whether direct or implied, that are capable of objective substantiation."

4. The CAP Code, Section 50.1, states "Medical and scientific claims made about beauty and health-related products should be backed by evidence, where appropriate consisting of trials conducted on people..."

5. I challenge whether Bill Sohan holds documentary evidence for his claim that he can heal humans and animals at a distance, and I challenge whether his claim is backed by appropriate evidence consisting of trials conducted on people.

6. I confirm that I have no connections with the advertiser, Nexus Magazine, or with the publishing industry in general. I confirm that I am not involved in legal proceedings with the advertiser or Nexus Magazine.

7. I confirm that I am happy to be identified as the complainant."