J Indian Acad Forensic Med, 32(3)

ISSN 0971-0973

Editorial

Unethical advertisements and role of IMA

Some rights clearly do conflicts, and a hierarchy must be established at some point. In the
West, National Constitutions have sometimes been defined so that freedom of speech includes
freedom of Advertisement by Corporations. On the other hand, there is some National Law and
now an International law, a Right to adequate health. Indian Constitution in Article 19 protects
Fundamental Right to speech and expression which includes Right to Advertisement also.
Advertisement is a public notice offering or asking for goods, services etc. it includes any
notice, circular, label, wrapper, or any other document including Advertisement through internet
or any other media in electronic or print form and also includes any visible representation made
by means of any hoarding, wall painting, signal, light, sound, smoke or gas.
As per point 6.1, Chapter 6 of the Indian Medical Council (Professional Conducts, Ethics
& Etiquette) Regulations 2002, advertisement has been defined under Unethical Acts. No
medical Professional is allowed to advertise in any way which invites attention to his
professional position, skill, associations, affiliations, honors or such character that would
ordinarily result in his self aggrandizements. One cannot print his self photograph.
In the past IMA calls for ban on TV Ads for prescription-only drugs concerned
over a television ad that urges people to take prescription drugs without mentioning the risks, the
Indian Medical Association (IMA) had short off a letter to the Drug Controller of Delhi, asking
him to stop the misleading advertisement.
The dug being illegally promoted was Disclowin Plus, which is a scheduled H drug that
can only be sold on a doctors prescription. The advertisement promote Disclowin Plus as a
cure for pain and head ache, even though its active ingredient Diclofenac Sodium is approved
to treat only arthritis and gout.
Disclowin Plus is a Non Steroidal Anti Inflammatory Drug (NSAID), with side effects
and it is not recommended for asthmatic, pregnent women, people who are allergic for
Aspirin and those at the risk of peptic ulcer or of gastro intestinal bleeding. "The
advertisement is misleading and makes the people believe it is a safe pain killer for Head
ache relief".
Side effect of Diclofenac include Headache, rash, flatulence, heart failure, blood
disorders, diarhoea, nausea, abdominal pain, ulcers in stomach or intestine, decreased
kidney function, inflammation of liver and severe blistering skin reaction affecting the
tissues of the eyes, mouth, throat and genitals.
But this time IMA with more than 200000 members itself accused of unethical advertisement.

The Medical Council of India (MCI), the statutory body regulating medical education and
practice, has found unethical the Indian Medical Association's endorsement of two food products
and barred such endorsements. The MCI would ask IMA, to stop endorsements.
The issue is the IMA's Rs 2.25-crore contract with Pepsico to allow Tropicana fruit juice and
Quaker oats to use the IMA logo on their packs for three years ending 2011. The controversy has
been raging for two years after Dr K V Babu, an IMA central committee member, complained to
MCI on June 6, 2008, that the endorsement violated medical ethics. After protracted
proceedings, the National Human Rights Commission served a notice on the association on June
30, 2010.
After some confusion on its own powers over IMA, MCI on August 18 declared that
IMA came under its jurisdiction and served a show-cause notice to the IMA ''for endorsing the
187

J Indian Acad Forensic Med, 32(3)

ISSN 0971-0973

product in violation of the provisions of the Indian Medical Council (Professional Conduct,
Etiquette and Ethics) Regulations, 2002.'' In its reply of August 30, 2010 IMA argued it had not
endorsed the products, but only entered into a MoU with Pepsico for a 'nutritional awareness
programme.'
MCI found this explanation unsatisfactory and summoned IMA Honorary Secretary- General for
a personal hearing and inspection of the MoU. ''Now it is clear that IMA was at fault by
endorsing the products. If the endorsements have not yet been stopped, they have to be, soon''.

Stand of MCI:
Board of Governors, presently in-charge of MCIs current affairs has decided to ask IMA
to stop such endorsements forthwith. Penal action, if any, will be decided by the MCI ethics
committee at its meeting. The decision will then have to be ratified by the Board of Directors
with in a week''.

IMAs Stand:
Earlier, IMA office bearers had said the decision to endorse the products was a mistake,
but it was unable to get out of the contract as the settlement amount would be too big.

Global Scenario:
It is claimed that in a similar case in 1988, the American Medical Association (AMA)
had to pay $9.9 million (Rs 45 crore) to withdraw from a contract it signed with Sunbeam
Corporation. While that was an endorsement of medical equipment, IMA became the first
professional body of doctors in the world to endorse a food product. In fact, IMA has
endorsement contracts with health and hygiene products including Dettol, Lizol (sanitizers),
Aquaguard (water purifier), Pampers (napkins) and Odomos (mosquito repellent).
It is the right time for IMAs present leadership to save its honour as well as of nobility of
medical profession. IMA should be model torch bearer of medical ethics as the largest body of
medical fraternity. It is not expected by them to act irresponsibly and unethically by becoming or
to be part of any unethical advertisement just for the sake of financial benefit.

Is there Need for amendment on this issue?

Executive Committee Report 2006 at Page No. 103, 104, Item No. 217, Advertising on
Starting Practice (F.No.330/2006) mentioned as follows:
The MCI approved the following recommendations of the Executive Committee/ Adhoc Committee:

The members of the Adhoc Committee appointed by the Honble Supreme Court and of the
Executive Committee of the Council considered the letter dated 7.4.2006 from Dr. Saurabh Dani
together with the following recommendation of the Ethics Committee dated 23rd & 24th August,
2006 with regard to amendment in the Code of Ethics Regulations 2002 Chapter 6 Sub Chapter
1, advertising is allowed on starting practice and decided to place the matter before the
General Body of the Council:
The Ethics Committee considered the letter dated 07.04.2006 from Dr. Saurabh Dani and decided to
inform him that as per Indian Medical Council (Professional Conduct, Etiquette and Ethics)
Regulations, 2002 as amended from time to time the word press is defined as Print Media only.
The Ethics Committee is of the opinion that in todays scenario, there is every reason to think the
word press may include some media other than the print media also. However, that needs
amendment of the present Regulations, 2002.
The Ethics Committee was of the opinion that in todays scenario, there is every reason to think the
word press may include some media other than the print media also. However, that needs
amendment of the present Regulations, 2002.

Most prevalent unethical practice among medical profession in India, which can be easily proved
as evidence are in record form, is related to issue of unethical advertisement and it needs
attention of all the sections of the society including MCI and IMA in larger public interest.
188