Botulinum toxin A, produced by the bacteria Clostridium Botulinum, is a potent neurotoxin that causes localized flaccid muscle paralysis. It is approved for the treatment of a variety of medical problems including cervical dystonia, strabismus, axillary hyperhidrosis, blepharospasm and glabellar wrinkles. Its use in facial cosmetic rejuvenation accounted for over 25% of all non-invasive surgical cosmetic procedures performed in the United States in 2008 (Jewell 2009). Botox (Allergan, Inc., Irvine, CA) and Dysport (Medicis Aesthetics, Scottsdale, AZ) are both approved by the FDA for the treatment of glabellar wrinkles and are used “off-label” for the treatment of forehead and periorbital wrinkles. Botox and Dysport are each derived from a unique strain of C. Botulinum using different proprietary methods, and as such have different chemical properties. Multiple studies have shown Botox and Dysport to be comparable in efficacy and safety but there are claims that Dysport has several advantages. These include longer duration, quicker onset, and a decreased risk of patients developing antibodies to the toxin (Nestor 2011). In addition, Dysport has a lower cost per treatment (Basil 2011). These potentially desirable characteristics make Dysport an attractive alternative to Botox. The objective of this study is to evaluate patients in our private practice in order to compare their Dysport experiences.