SUBCOMMITTEE FOCUSED ON IMPACT OF VARIOUS BILLS ON THE INDUSTRY

Washington, Sep 15, 2006 - "Over 36 million American wear contact lenses, and it is important to ensure that consumers are fairly treated in obtaining their lenses," said Rep. Cliff Stearns (R-FL), Chairman of the Commerce, Trade & Consumer Protection Subcommittee.  "Essentially, there are two markets for contact lenses, those distributed exclusively to eye care professionals for consumer purchase, and those distributed freely to all retailers, including eye care professionals and 'aftercare providers' such as 1-800-Contacts.  The concern raised to this subcommittee is that 'doctors-only' marketing limits competition for the aftercare providers."

As a result of legal action in the 1990s by 32 State Attorneys General, there is a consent decree involving contact lens manufacturers and distributors requiring the marketing of lenses to alternative channels of distribution so long as those entities ensure the validity of prescriptions and comply with all applicable laws.  The consent decree expires November 1, 2006.

Jonathan Coon, CEO of 1-800-Contacts, Inc., stated, "'Doctors only' lenses are marketed to eye doctors on their ability to increase prescription profits by limiting competition and compelling patients to return to prescribers for lens purchases."

Dr. Oliver Schein, a member of the American Academy of Ophthalmology, testified, "The responsible and ethical contact lens practitioner endeavors to optimize the safety and comfort of his or her patients by first evaluating the patient, fitting the lenses and then managing the patient's contact lens wear.  Accordingly, ongoing periodic evaluations after the initial prescription are very important...However, because patients can obtain replacement lenses so easily from online providers, they often neglect follow-up exams."

Testifying for the Federal Trade Commission, Maureen Ohlhausen, Director of the Office of Policy Planning, presented a conclusion from an FTC study, "'[T]he theory and the evidence examined do not support the conclusion that these distribution practices harm competition and consumers by allowing prescribers to lock in their patients to supracompetitively priced lenses.'"

Concluded Stearns, "Although there are bills before Congress to regulate the contact lens industry, and differing views on those bills, I must point out that bills and their impact can drastically change through the amendment process.  I would urge manufacturers, distributors, and eye care professionals to work together in meeting the needs of the consumer and avoid legislation, even after the consent decree expires."