Kris Jenner, photographed by Jim Jordan at White Cross Studios, 2014. · Photo: Jim Jordan · CC BY-SA 2.0· Cropped to suit the layout.
Editorial portrait. Not a photograph of HPA treatment or a before-and-after comparison.
01 / THE DOCUMENTED EVENTS
What is on the public record.
B&P, the company behind Frownies, sued Kris Jenner following a facelift discussed publicly during their advertising partnership. The company saw a conflict with its positioning as a non-surgical approach to wrinkles. The dispute ended in a confidential settlement; that outcome does not establish that a court prohibited the procedure.
A personal treatment decision can affect the credibility of an ongoing product campaign and trigger a contractual dispute.
03 / WHERE HPA COULD HELP
Where thoughtful care could make a contribution.
In a comparable situation, the HPA framework provides for independent review of an external treatment proposal and a second professor's opinion before certain lasting changes. Factoring in public appearances allows time for separate discussions about the campaign. The individual decides whether to proceed; legal assessment remains with their advisers and those of the company.
These publicly documented cases illustrate different risks: contract disputes, conflicting advertising claims, interrupted care and later negative associations with a brand. The people and companies are editorial case studies; their inclusion does not imply that HPA has cared for them. Each HPA perspective is a hypothetical application of our proposed services, not evidence that HPA could have prevented the events described.
These editorial portraits identify the people discussed. They may have been taken at a different time from the events in the case study. We draw no clinical findings or conclusions about treatment needs from their appearance.
