By another name: On misleading advertisements, fake medicine
The HinduOn August 27, a Bench of the Supreme Court of India found itself reaching, once again, for idioms over a matter involving misleading With the Ministry’s cynical attempt now to sidestep Rule 170 of the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules 1945, which penalises misleading advertisements of ayurveda, siddha, and unani products, the Court confronts an old tendency in a new disguise. The Court may also seem sated by a demand, as it spelled out in its May 7 order, that all advertisers self-declare that they will not publish misleading advertisements. Medicine quality and manufacturer inspections are disuniform, more so in the alternative medicines space, and regulating advertisements has emerged as a last-ditch backstop against bad products entering the market. In the face of progressively weakening protections against what is ultimately fake medicine, the most preferred outcome in the present matter would be for the Court to look at past declarations — self-made or otherwise — and into rectifying the quality-control regime, particularly to empower it, protect it from political capture, and bring alternative medicines under its purview.