Supreme Court of India’s actions against misleading advertisements

Source: The post Supreme Court of India’s actions against misleading advertisements has been created, based on the article “By another name: Courts should act against fake medicine, not just control advertising” published in “The Hindu” on 30th August 2024

UPSC Syllabus Topic: GS Paper2- Governance-Issues relating to development and management of Social Sector/Services relating to Health and transparency and accountability

Context: The article discusses the Supreme Court of India’s actions against misleading advertisements for Ayurvedic, Siddha, and Unani products. It highlights the Ministry of AYUSH’s attempts to evade quality regulations, urging stronger protections against fake medicines in the market.

For detailed information on misleading advertisements read Article 1, Article 2

What Actions Has the Supreme Court of India Taken Against Misleading Advertisements?

1. Intervention Against Patanjali Ayurved: The Supreme Court concluded a case against Patanjali Ayurved earlier this year for making unverified medicinal claims. The company was ordered to issue public apologies through media advertisements.
2. Regulatory Bodies Activated: Following the Court’s intervention, state-level regulatory agencies began taking action against Patanjali Ayurved for its misleading claims.
3. Enforcement of Rule 170: The Court is addressing the Ministry of AYUSH’s attempts to evade Rule 170 of the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules of 1945, which penalizes misleading advertisements of Ayurvedic, Siddha, and Unani products.
4. Call for Stronger Regulations: The Court emphasized the need for more robust quality control and regulatory oversight to prevent fake medicines from entering the market.

What Challenges Do Drug Manufacturers and Regulators Face?

1. Balancing Quality and Cost: Manufacturers must ensure high-quality standards, which raises production costs. At the same time, they need to keep drug prices affordable for patients. This balance is often difficult to achieve, leading to compromises in quality.
2. Inconsistent Regulation: There is a lack of uniformity in medicine quality inspections, particularly in the alternative medicines sector, which includes Ayurvedic, Siddha, and Unani products. This inconsistency allows substandard products to enter the market.
3. Lax Regulatory Oversight: The Ministry of AYUSH has allowed products to be registered under misleading categories, like licensing milk as “Ayurvedic proprietary medicine.” This contributes to the problem of unregulated and potentially harmful products being sold to consumers.
4. Political Influence: Regulatory bodies face challenges in maintaining independence from political pressures, which can hinder their ability to enforce quality standards effectively.

Question for practice:

Discuss the actions taken by the Supreme Court of India against misleading advertisements for Ayurvedic, Siddha, and Unani products and the challenges faced by drug manufacturers and regulators in ensuring quality control.