The Supreme Court has said doctors should prescribe only generic drugs. The court made this remark while hearing a PIL seeking tighter regulation of pharmaceutical marketing practices
The Supreme Court observation marks a potentially pivotal moment in India’s healthcare policy landscape. Here’s a concise breakdown of the key points and implications:
Context and Background
- Petition Origin: The PIL was filed by the Federation of Medical & Sales Representatives Associations of India (FMSRAI), highlighting unethical promotional practices in pharma marketing.
- Core Issue: Pharmaceutical companies are allegedly incentivizing doctors to prescribe branded medicines, often at the expense of affordability and ethics.
Supreme Court’s Observation
- Generic-Only Prescriptions: The court strongly suggested that doctors should be mandated to prescribe only generic drugs.
- Example Cited: Rajasthan already has an executive instruction enforcing this.
- Goal: Align medical practice with public interest by reducing patient costs and limiting pharma influence.
What Are Generic Drugs?
- Equivalent to branded drugs in safety, efficacy, dosage, and use.
- Cost-Effective: Significantly cheaper due to the absence of brand promotion and R&D costs.
- Legally Supported: India’s 1970 Patent Act helped make India a global hub for generics.
Opposition from the Medical Community
- Indian Medical Association (IMA):
- Opposes the move to enforce generic prescriptions.
- Argues: If branded drugs are legally licensed, why should doctors be penalized for prescribing them?
- Successfully lobbied to delay the NMC’s 2023 mandate requiring generic-only prescriptions.
Implications Going Forward
- Policy Tensions: The court’s stand may renew momentum toward stricter regulation, countering pharmaceutical marketing pressures.
- Next Hearing in July: The case’s outcome could lead to national-level legal mandates, depending on how the court interprets the regulatory responsibilities of the government.