You are here

  • Home
  • Archive
  • Volume 45, Issue 1
  • Comment on ‘Exaggerating contraceptive efficacy: the implications of the Advertising Standards Authority action against Natural Cycles’

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
Letter to the editor
Comment on ‘Exaggerating contraceptive efficacy: the implications of the Advertising Standards Authority action against Natural Cycles’
  1. Emily McIlwaine,
  2. Simon Rowland,
  3. Elina Berglund Scherwitzl,
  4. Raoul Scherwitzl
  1. Medical Communications, Natural Cycles Nordic AB, Stockholm, Sweden
  1. Correspondence to Dr Raoul Scherwitzl, NaturalCycles Nordic AB, Stockholm S-111 37, Sweden; raoul.scherwitzl{at}naturalcycles.com

https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjsrh-2018-200285

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    We have read with interest the recent opinion article by Hough and Bryce1 in BMJ Sexual and Reproductive Health. We would like to thank the authors for sharing their opinions and we wish to address some misunderstandings.

    The ruling delivered by the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) in August 2018 was based on one Natural Cycles advertisement, which ran for approximately 4 weeks in mid-2017. After the ASA notified the company that three complaints had been lodged, the advert was removed and all content was updated to ensure that a balanced message highlighting the limitations of the method is communicated to all potential consumers. This action was taken more than 1 year ago and therefore this particular critique is …

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Competing interests None declared.

    • Patient consent Not required.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; internally peer reviewed.