MedPlus Health Services Limited - Medplus

Recommendation: Upheld | Medium: General Public

The ASCI had approached the advertiser for its response in addressing the grievances of the complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request to respond to the same. The advertiser was offered an option to seek an Informal Resolution (IR) of the complaint by modifying or withdrawing the claims in the advertisement or alternately to substantiate the claims with supporting data. The advertiser was also offered an opportunity for a telecon with the ASCI Secretariat, which they did not avail and neither did they submit their written response. The Consumer Complaints Council (CCC) viewed the print advertisement (in Bengali) and considered the complaint. The CCC observed that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date as specified by the ASCI Secretariat. Upon careful consideration of the complaint and in the absence of response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim (in Bengali) as translated in English, “The composition of MedPlus medicine and the medicine prescribed by your doctor is the same”, was not substantiated with supporting evidence to prove that there is no difference in the composition of the medication prescribed by a doctor and the medication prescribed by MedPlus. The claim (in Bengali) as translated in English, “MedPlus brand drugs and drugs prescribed by your doctor are manufactured in the same factory and both types of drugs are of the same quality”, was not substantiated with supporting evidence to prove that the medications prescribed by a doctor and those under the MedPlus brand are produced in the same factory and both types of drugs are of equivalent quality. The source for these claims was not indicated in the advertisement. The claims are misleading by exaggeration and are likely to lead to widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers. The said claims in the advertisement contravened Chapter I, Clauses 1.1, 1.2, 1.4 and 1.5 of the ASCI Code. This complaint was UPHELD Claim (in Bengali) as translated in English - “Medplus is able to offer 50-80% discount while maintaining the highest quality because Medplus does not have additional marketing and distribution costs” - the CCC discussed that the advertiser is informing the viewers that since they do not incur additional marketing or distribution expenses, they can provide discount on their medicines. This discount offer being made is entirely the advertiser’s internal business plan. The CCC noted that the advertiser has not claimed that there are no marketing and distribution costs involved for giving a discount on their Medplus brand of medicines. Hence the CCC did not consider the said claim to be objectionable, and concluded that the claim is not in contravention of Chapter I of the ASCI Code. This complaint was NOT UPHELD by majority.