Most of what is sold to doctors as reputation is now prohibited
There is a trade in standing for doctors — awards, plaques, rankings, paid features, promised walk-ins. On 6 October 2026 a large part of it became a registration risk. There is a legitimate version of the same thing, and it is narrower, slower and more useful.
What is actually being sold
Walk into most consulting rooms in India and the wall carries certificates, plaques, shields and trophies. Somebody sold those. In many cases a pharmaceutical representative paid for the table at the conference where they were given.
We are not going to tell you that is worthless — recognition from your peers is real, and some of those awards are earned. But two things are now true about the ones that are not.
- Under the 6 October guidelines, any award or ranking used in advertising must be independently verifiable. A plaque funded by a company that sells you a drug is difficult to describe that way.
- Under UCPMP 2024, industry may not fund travel or hospitality for a doctor unless the doctor is a speaker, and may not give gifts for personal benefit or cash grants.
A physician shall not make use of him or her, or his or her name, as subject of any form or manner of advertising or publicity through any mode … which is of such a character as to invite attention to him or to his professional position, skill, qualification, achievements, attainments, specialties, appointments, associations, affiliations or honours.
Regulation 6.1.1, IMC Regulations 2002Read that list again. Achievements, attainments, appointments, associations, affiliations, honours.
It is, item for item, the feature list of a profile-enhancement package. That is why we do not sell one.
You may teach. You may not be the subject.
Two clauses, read together, draw a line sharp enough to work from. One licenses almost everything worth doing. The other prohibits almost everything being sold.
| Regulation 7.11 permits | Regulation 6.1.1 prohibits |
|---|---|
| Writing to the lay press under your own name on matters of public health | Contributing articles or interviews about diseases and treatments that have the effect of advertising yourself or soliciting practice |
| Delivering public lectures, and giving talks on radio, television or internet chat for the same purpose | Making yourself the subject of publicity in any mode that invites attention to your position, skill or honours |
| Sending announcements of those talks to the lay press | Boasting of cases, operations, cures or remedies, or permitting their publication |
Regulation 7.11 is the clause most compliance commentary omits. It is the licence for everything on this page. Both quoted from the 2002 Regulations.
Regulation 6.1.1 bars giving an endorsement “whether for compensation or otherwise.” Payment is not the test. An unpaid profile piece about how good you are is caught; a paid lecture about a disease may not be. The question is always what the content is about, not who paid for it.
What we do, and the rule each one sits under
Your registration resolves, your qualifications are verifiable, your affiliations agree across every source, and every post carries what the guidelines now require it to carry.
What this involvesDisease, advances, prevention, what a procedure involves, what it costs — published in your own name, on channels you own. Never about you.
What this involvesYour papers, chapters, talks, trial participation and teaching, surfaced and indexed as fact. Findable by a referring doctor and by a machine.
What this involvesConference platforms, society roles, journal review, teaching appointments. Peer-facing standing, which is the kind the rules leave alone.
What this involvesEverything published in your name — yours, your hospital’s, your agency’s, your listings. What to take down. What to refuse. Checked continuously.
What this involvesWe do not publish anything in your name until we have seen what is already there. For most consultants the first month of work is removal, not production.
Request a reviewIf you would rather read the offer than the regulation
The five pages above lead with the rule each service sits under. These three lead with what you actually get.
- Educational and public-health content in your own name (Reg 7.11)
- Publishing your consultation fees — expressly permitted
- A factual directory entry with qualifications and registration — treated as patient information, not promotion
- Academic discussion, health awareness programmes, public health campaigns
- Speaking at a conference, including with industry-funded travel where you are the speaker (UCPMP 2024)
Permitted column: Regs 7.11, 7.12 and 6.1.1 of the 2002 Code; 6 October 2026 guidelines as reported; UCPMP 2024 speaker exception. Refusals: Regs 6.1.1–6.1.2 and the same guidelines.
- Buy you an award, a ranking, a ‘Top 10’ listing or a paid feature
- Place paid content with an influencer, celebrity or third party on your behalf
- Write or solicit a patient testimonial, review or success story — consent does not make it permissible
- Publish before-and-after images for promotion
- Take a fee tied to leads, enquiries, walk-ins or patients procured
- Buy links, followers or rankings, or manipulate algorithms to inflate your standing
- Describe you as best, leading, No.1 or most trusted
Who this is not for
- If you want a number of patients a month guaranteed, we cannot do it and nobody can do it lawfully. “Digital mass solicitation” is named in the guidelines as a serious violation carrying six to twelve months’ suspension.
- If you want the wall of plaques extended, we are the wrong firm.
- If your problem is capacity, waiting time or how the phone is answered, marketing will make it worse. We will say so at the review stage and not invoice you.
The first month is usually removal, not production.
A review of what is already published in your name, against the 6 October guidelines and the 2002 Code. You get the list whether or not you engage us.
- Guidelines on Ethical Advertising and Public Communication, NMC, 6 October 2026 — see our rule-by-rule page for the three independent reports relied on
- IMC (Professional Conduct, Etiquette and Ethics) Regulations 2002, Regs 6.1.1, 6.1.2, 7.11, 7.12 — text
- Uniform Code of Pharmaceutical Marketing Practices 2024, on industry funding and the speaker exception — National Medical Journal of India
- Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act 1954, ss.3 and 7 and the Schedule — see our page on it
Not legal advice. Published 22 October 2026 · last reviewed 22 October 2026.