Well-being coaching: a survey reveals 80% of anomalies among the professionals checked | The USA Print

In 2021 and 2022, the DGCCRF, Directorate General for Competition, Consumer Affairs and Fraud Prevention, conducted the survey among 165 professionals and training establishments in the “wellness coaching” sector. Coaches in connection with physiological or mental balance, “life coaches” or “personal development”, have been particularly targeted, with “particular attention paid to offers oriented towards seniors”, indicates the institute in a press release. (source 1).

The result is particularly worrying:the practices of nearly 80% of the professionals checked presented an anomaly“. 20% of the personnel checked even showed “misleading business practices“: qualifications not held, use of therapeutic claims… Also, more than half did not know “the regulations on information and the delivery of documents to consumers” (lack of information on prices, abusive clauses in contracts …).

The investigation also revealed a dark formation. High costs “for sometimes very short periods”, “certificates of training in free denominations wrongly presented as diplomas with qualification value”…

And as if that weren’t enough, “practices related to the misuse of medical data (request for consumer blood tests), or likely to be similar to sectarian excesseswere also noted, and were the subject of reports to the competent authorities”, indicated the DGCCRF.

Faced with this, the administration attached to the Ministry of the Economy “calls on consumers subscribing to “coaching” services to stay alertto find out about the skills and titles of professionals”. The DGCCRF reminds you that it is possible to report a professional on the site SignalConso.

It is important to be particularly careful if a “coach” claims to be able to treat a health problem: always refer to a health professional in the event of illness.

The DGCCRF had already sounded the alarm in 2022 about “unconventional” medicines: naturopathy, magnetism… 66% of anomalies had then been noted (source 2).