In Chief Constable of Lothian and Borders Police v Cumming, the EAT has held that a person's inability to meet the physical requirements for entry into a profession is not a relevant adverse effect on that person's ability to carry out normal day to day activities for the purposes of establishing disability under the Disability Discrimination Act. The EAT accepted that Ms Cumming's mild eyesight impairment did affect her ability to carry out certain day to day activities and further that this impairment was the reason behind the police force's refusal to progress her job application. However, the refusal to progress her application could not be seen as an adverse effect of her impairment because the process of making a job application did not imply any physical activity. It is not the intention of the DDA that a subsisting physical impairment which causes little or no adverse effects should render a person disabled simply because an employer rejects that person's job application on the grounds of their impairment. The question of whether or not a person is disabled should not be dependent on an employer's reaction to their impairment.