Over the last few years, multiple controversies have erupted over the legality and ethics of advertising campaigns in English language newspapers, launched by companies manufacturing Ayurvedic products. These sellers often claims that their products can treat a wide range of diseases like cancer and diabetes. Little attention however has been paid to the digital space and the role played by Big Tech platforms in advertising Ayurvedic and homeopathic products in violation of two Indian laws: the Drugs & Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 1954 (DMRA) and Rule 106 of the Drugs & Cosmetics Rules, 1945 (DCR).
In a recent study, conducted by both of us and available for download over here, we surveyed the advertising policies of Google, Meta and Amazon to examine their approach to the issue of advertising Ayurvedic and homeopathic products claiming to cure or treat diseases and medical conditions. Unlike user-generated content for which these Big Tech platforms enjoy qualified immunity in India, they do not enjoy any immunity for advertisements which they publish after receiving payment from the advertiser. It is for this reason that these Big Tech platforms have detailed policies in most countries where they operate, specifying the types of products that can be advertised on their platforms. When it comes specifically to products like medicines claiming to have a therapeutic effect on the human body by curing or treating diseases, Big Tech platforms have very specific policies. Illustratively, the policies for Google, Meta and Amazon can be accessed over here, here and here.
The reason for these detailed policies is because the advertising of drugs or any product claiming to have a therapeutic effect is highly regulated in most countries. In fact, except for the United States and New Zealand, no other country allows for the advertisement of prescription drugs. At most some jurisdictions may allow for the advertisement of Over-the-counter (OTC) drugs. The reason for this is simple – most countries prefer that their citizens get their information related to pharmaceutical products directly from their trained doctors. Given the sensitivity of healthcare in most countries, violations of laws regulating healthcare advertising are not taken very kindly. Many countries prescribe imprisonment as a punishment for violating the law. As a result, Big Tech platforms tend to take the issue very seriously and they have extensive vetting processes to screen advertisements related to pharmaceuticals or any other product claiming to have a therapeutic effect. The only jurisdiction where Big Tech appears to throw caution to the wind, is India.
As explained in our report, these Big Tech platforms display advertisements for Ayurvedic and homeopathic products making wild claims of therapeutic efficacy for diseases and medical conditions ranging from diabetes to cancer to depression. Under Indian law, Ayurvedic and homeopathic products can be manufactured and sold without proof of therapeutic efficacy or safety. However, this does not mean they can make any claim under the sun. Laws like the DMRA and DCR, specifically prohibit them from making claims of being capable to curing specific medical conditions on their labelling and in advertisements. That this industry, which is referred to by the acronym Ayush in India, regularly violates this law is old news. A massive controversy erupted in 2022 when Patanjali, a company founded by a Yoga guru close to the Modi government, published advertisements on the front pages of English language for Ayurvedic products claiming to treat conditions like diabetes, hypertension etc. in brazen violation of the DMRA.
Big Tech appears to have learnt no lessons from that controversy. Many of the documented in our report, are likely in violation of the DMRA & DCR, as well as Big Tech’s own internal policies. Through a combination of keyword searches on their platforms and trawling through their publicly available advertisement related databases, we were able to identify several advertisements published by Google, Meta and Amazon for Ayurvedic and homeopathic products claiming to treat the following diseases: diabetes, blood pressure, glaucoma, epilepsy, stomach ulcers, cholesterol, depression, kidney stones, cataract of the eye, cancer, rheumatism, leukoderma, prostrate conditions and polycystic ovarian disorder. Each of these medical conditions are listed either in the DMRA and DCR as conditions for which no advertisement can be published in India.
Particularly astonishing are advertisements published by Google, under its grant making program for charitable institutions, for Ayurvedic products claiming to treat different forms of cancer. Illustratively, published below, is a screenshot of an advertisement from Google’s advertisement database for a non-profit called Kisan Kisani Vikas Trust offering cow urine therapy to cure different types of cancer. The second advertisement, specifically offers to treat blood cancer using cow urine therapy. Both advertisements were supported by the “Google Ad Grants” program wherein Google offers free ad space for charitable organisations on its platforms.
In addition to the above advertisements, Google features a whole range of advertisements for Ayurvedic and homeopathic products claiming to treat a range of medical conditions specifically prohibited under Indian law.
Meta is no better and perhaps more dangerous given its reputation for delivering highly personalised advertisements to its users on Facebook and Instagram. Given the nature of the Meta advertisement databank, many of the advertisements we mention in the report are no longer available but we do have screenshots indicating reference number and the date on which an advertisement campaign was initiated. Some of Patanjali’s advertisements, like the one below, are for products which Patanjali claims can “reverse” fourth stage cancer:
We also found several advertisements by Patanjali, featuring products that were at the centre of the controversy in 2022. One such advertisement featuring products for treating Hepatitis C, blood pressure, “sugar management” (diabetes) is reproduced below:
Amazon has a similar track record. A search on its website, with the keywords “ayurveda cancer drug”, displays advertisements for Ayurvedic products with names like “Cancertame Ayurvedic Bharatved” and others offering “holistic cancer care”. The following is a screenshot from the Amazon website, displaying such advertisements:
In addition, Amazon displays a whole range of advertisements for Ayurvedic products claiming to treat a whole range of medical conditions ranging from diabetes to depression.
In addition to featuring advertisements, Amazon is also likely in violation of the law for featuring many of the above products on its online marketplace. As an online platform/intermediary for third party sellers, Amazon does have limited immunity under Section 79 of the Information Technology Act provided it exercises “due diligence”. In other countries, Amazon has strict policies on the type of healthcare products that can feature on its marketplace. That is not the case for its India specific policy. Instead of specifically warning sellers against listing products with labelling that is in violation of the DMRA and DCR, it merely makes a mention of the DMRA under the heading of “Additional References” in its policy on “over the counter” drugs. In its policy for homeopathic products, it merely requires a self-signed declaration from the seller that it is in compliance with the Drugs & Cosmetics Act – no such declaration on compliance with the DMRA is required from sellers. It is difficult to believe that such silence on the DMRA was by mistake when the section on OTC drugs makes a cursory reference to the DMRA. This is unlike its policies for the American market which features very detailed labelling requirements for several products which are not even in the healthcare space.
Given the army of lawyers working for Big Tech in India, it is difficult to believe that the negligence displayed by Big Tech towards Indian laws like the DMRA and Rule 106 of the DCR was a mere oversight. It is unlikely that they will face criminal prosecution by the Indian state for these violations of Indian law, given the impossibility of extraditing the relevant management personnel from the United States to India. It is this knowledge that makes it possible for Big Tech to operate with impunity in India.