Anvita Ahuja MBBS student, Kasturba Medical College, Mangalore, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, Karnataka 576104, India
Prateek Rastogi Professor and Head Department of Forensic Medicine and Toxicology, Kasturba Medical College, Mangalore, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, Karnataka 576104, India
Supriya Kapoor Junior Resident-Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Rabindranath Tagore Medical College, Udaipur, Rajasthan 313001,, India
Address for correspondence: Anvita Ahuja, MBBS student, Kasturba Medical College, Mangalore, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, Karnataka 576104, India E-mail: ahujaanvita@gmail.com
This license enables reusers to distribute, remix, adapt, and build upon the material in any medium or format for noncommercial purposes only, and only so long as attribution is given to the creator.
Anvita Ahuja, Prateek Rastogi, Supriya Kapoor/Healthcare Ethics and Promotional Advertising: A Difficult Relationship/ IndianJ.ForensicMedPathol.2021;14(1):53–58.
Timeline
Received : November 18, 2020
Accepted : March 23, 2021
Published : March 30, 2021
Abstract
Participation of health-care professionals in the advertising business has been subject to a
raging debate since days beyond recall. It has gained more acceptance but was despised in the
past. The Code of Ethics of many National Medical Councils around the world has maintained
that for a medical professional to engage in commercial advertising of himself or some other
product is unethical-owing to the influence and the cultural authority that a health-care
professional holds. This paper reviews instances where medical professionals and bodies have
beenreportedtohaveexplicitlyortacitlylenttheirsupporttobrandendorsements.Malpractices
within the advertising industry in relation to medical fraternity-such as untrue/conjectural claims, distortion of words of a reliable medical body etcetera have also been discussed.
References
1. Indian Medical Council (Professional Conduct, Etiquette and Ethics), Regulations, 2002. Published in part III, section 4 of the Gazette of India dated 6th April, 2002. [cited 2020 Aug 1] Available at: https://www.mciindia.org/ documents/rulesAndRegulations/Ethics%20 Regulations-2002.pdf.
2. Bates v. State Bar of Arizona, 433 U.S. 350 (1977) [Internet]. Justia Law. 2020 [cited 2020 Aug 1]. Available from: https://supreme.justia.com/ cases/federal/us/433/350/.
3. Strach L., 2004. Hospital Advertising in the Beginning: Marketplace Dynamics and the Lifting of the Ban. Essays in economic and business history: the journal of the economic and business historical society, 22(ISSN 0896-226X), pp.229-239.
4. Stout Timothy, The Testimony of DHMO, Creation Matters, 2013 May; 18(3) 5-6.
5. Staff e. ASCI upholds complaints against 299 out of 489 advertisements, 151 ads withdrawn - Exchange4media [Internet]. Indian Advertising Media & Marketing News–exchange4media. 2020 [cited 2020 Aug 1]. Available from: https:// www.exchange4media.com/advertising-news/ asci-upholds-complaints-against-299-out-of-489- advertisements-151-ads-withdrawn-100346.html.
6. ASCI upheld complaints against 248 advertisements in November, 2019 [Internet]. www.bestmediaifo. com. 2020 [cited 2020 Aug 1]. Available from: https://bestmediainfo.com/2020/02/asciupheld-complaints-against-248-advertisementsin-november-2019/.
7. Singhania M. ACSI whip on IMA RECOMMENDED Paint Ad featuring Ranbir Kapoor and Deepika Padukone [Internet]. Medicaldialogues.in. 2020 [cited 2020 Aug 1]. Available from: https:// m edi c aldi al ogu e s .i n/ a c si-w hip- on- im arecommended-paint-ad-featuring-ranbir-kapoorand-deepika-padukone.
8. 10 objectionable ads withdrawn after ASCI's intervention in January 2020 [Internet]. www. bestmediaifo.com.2020 [cited 2020 Aug 1]. Available from: https://bestmediainfo.com/ 2020 /05/110-objectionable-ads-withdrawn-after-asciintervention-in-january-2020/#SM_HC.
9. ASCI investigates complaints against 251 ads in May 2020 [Internet]. www.bestmediaifo.com. 2020.[cited 2020 Aug 1] Available from: https:// bestmediainfo.com/2020/07/asci-investigatescomplaints-against-251-ads-in-may-2020/. 10. The Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 1954; sec 3(d) [cited on 2020 Aug 1]. Available from: http://www.rfhha. org/images/pdf/Hospital_Laws/Drugs_magic_ remedies_%28%20advertisement%29_act.pdf. Anvita Ahuja, Prateek Rastogi, Supriya Kapoor/Healthcare Ethics and Promotional Advertising: A Difficult RelationshipIndian Journal of Forensic Medicine and Pathology / Volume 14 Number 1 / January - March 2021 58 Indian Journal of Forensic Medicine and Pathology
11. ASCI resolves 221 complaints of misleading ads in May [Internet]. 2020 [cited 2020 Aug 1]. Available from: https://www.financialexpress.com/ brandwagon/asci-resolves-221-complaints-ofmisleading-ads-in-may/2040102/.
12. Sukhlecha A. Is brand endorsement by medical associations ethical? Indian Journal of Medical Ethics. 2008; 5(3):104-5. doi: 10.20529/ IJME.2008.038.
13. Times News Network. IMA faces ire for endorsing juice brand. The Times of India 2008 May 8. [cited 2020 Aug 1]. Available from: https://timesofindia. indiatime s. com/india/IMA-face s-ire-forendorsing-juice-brand/articleshow/3019870.cms.
14. Thomas G. Medical Council of India and the Indian Medical Association: uneasy relations. Indian Journal of Medical Ethics. 2011; 8(1):2. doi: https://doi.org/10.20529/IJME.2011.001.
15. Broken Deal Costs A.M.A. $9.9 Million [Internet]. Nytimes.com. 2020 [cited 2020 Aug 1]. Available from: https://www.nytimes.com/1998/08/03/ us/broken-deal-costs-ama-9.9-million.html.
16. Gardner M, Brandt A. “The Doctors’ Choice Is America’s Choice”. American Journal of Public Health. 2006; 96(2):222-232.
About this article
Cite this article
Anvita Ahuja, Prateek Rastogi, Supriya Kapoor/Healthcare Ethics and Promotional Advertising: A Difficult Relationship/ IndianJ.ForensicMedPathol.2021;14(1):53–58.
This license enables reusers to distribute, remix, adapt, and build upon the material in any medium or format for noncommercial purposes only, and only so long as attribution is given to the creator.
This license enables reusers to distribute, remix, adapt, and build upon the material in any medium or format for noncommercial purposes only, and only so long as attribution is given to the creator.