Type "cosmetic surgery" into your Internet search engine and several hundred thousand sites will appear. All enthuse about the benefits and increasing popularity of their techniques. They identify and detail medical practitioners qualified to work their miracles on the human body. Few negatives are to be found in such promotional material, and much of the hype is not dissimilar to that used to market other lifestyle products. This is but part of the global rise of the entrepreneurial approach to healthcare. Cosmetic surgery is in demand because of the changing culture and attitude of patients. For some in today's world there is a need to satisfy a desire for what, in times gone by, would be unrealistic expectations — changes to their bodies to enhance their appearance — at least in their own eyes.

If we take the definition used by the New South Wales Committee of Inquiry into Cosmetic Surgery, "cosmetic surgery" is any cosmetic procedure "performed to reshape normal structures of the body or to adorn part of the body, with the aim of improving the consumer's appearance and self-esteem". It "is initiated by the consumer, not medical need", and "excludes reconstructive surgery".1 This lies outside the traditional boundaries of medicine, which saw the profession dedicated to saving lives, healing and promoting health.2 Cosmetic surgery is not rebatable under Medicare, nor covered by health insurance. There are relatively few referrals. However, it does provide a service for which consumers are prepared to pay.

Traditionally, the medical profession has prohibited advertising in its codes of ethics. The traditional view is that doctors should develop a reputation for excellence based on a reputation among their peers, rather than by the advertising of their services directly to the public. This minimises the opportunity for patients to be misled by claims of superiority of a technique or individual. Particularly in Australia and the United Kingdom, general practitioners have long been "gatekeepers" to specialist services. This role has helped maintain quality care for patients and has probably helped to contain overall costs in the healthcare system. But with the demise of paternalism, both in society and in the professions, this way of doing things has attracted increasing criticism. Undoubtedly, this forms part of the rationale for applying trade practice law to the health sector and to advertising by doctors, and to the interpretation of such law by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission. Under federal law in Australia the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cwlth) now permits advertising, unless it is likely to mislead or deceive. Direct advertising by doctors to the public is now lawful.

The article by Ring in this issue of the Journal (page 597)3 asks if ethical standards are a casualty in the promotion of cosmetic surgery, and shows that this specialty is being seen as part of the beauty industry rather than a procedure for meeting health needs. The promotional strategies used do not sit well within the medical environment. The beauty industry promotes a body image that draws on vanity rather than on health. It creates expectations linked to perpetual youth, which can feed insecurities in people of both sexes, and contributes to a youth culture which treats with contempt the results of the ageing process.2

On the other hand, people who wish to change their image are now being informed that there are treatments available. The World Medical Association Declaration on the Rights of the Patient says that, "The patient has the right to self-determination, to make free decisions regarding himself/herself. The physician will inform the patient of the consequences of his/her decision".4 Should not patient autonomy include the freedom of adults to purchase these treatments, as long as the advertising surrounding them remains within the ethical boundaries of truthfulness?

Where should the boundaries lie between medicine as traditionally defined, and lifestyle-modification medicine? The Australian Medical Association (AMA) Code of Ethics encourages doctors to promote the health and well-being of their patients and prohibits doctors from behaving in their own self-interest. It also says that doctors have "a responsibility to their patients to recommend only those diagnostic procedures necessary to assist in the care of patients and only that therapy necessary for their well being".5 Many patients would say that changing their image through cosmetic surgery is for their well-being, as it would improve their quality of life. It is a personal decision based on personal perceptions.

If we consider that cosmetic surgery is part of medicine, then the advertising and promotion of such procedures must adhere to the ethical guidelines of the medical profession. The AMA believes that, as a general principle, advertisements must be honest, must not exploit patients' vulnerability or lack of medical knowledge, and should provide only factual information. Any advertisement for a doctor's services should present information that is reasonably necessary for making an informed decision about the appropriateness and availability of the medical services offered.6

In recognition of the need for a middle ground between the traditional ban on advertising and the current deregulated environment, the Medical Practitioners Board of Victoria has produced draft guidelines which will provide clear guidance for doctors who wish to advertise their services. A summary of the guidelines is presented in the Box.7

Whether we agree with changes in contemporary views which have allowed doctors to enter the free market of advertised services, or prefer the traditional culture, the one interwoven thread which must run unbroken through the fabric of medical practice is that of standards of ethical practice and the primacy of the patient.