TGA Advertising Portal and Complaint System now live; Industry embrace permissible indications

See: https://www.tga.gov.au/advertising-hub and: https://ajp.com.au/news/tga-explains-new-advertising-landscape/

However, there are still concerns about the transparency of the new system and my colleagues and I are holding off submitting complaints until we know:

  1. The outcome of the TGA Consultation: Complaints handling – Advertising therapeutic goods to the public (and publication of the public submissions).
  2. The Therapeutic Goods Information (Outcomes of Advertising Complaints Investigations) Specification 2018 has been enacted (which in theory allows for more transparency of compliant outcomes).

Meanwhile, the Therapeutic Goods (Permissible Indications) Determination No.1 of 2018 came into operation on March 6, 2018 while the Choice campaign to disallow it finally produced a commitment from the Labor Party to address consumer concerns if elected. Disallowance was considered impractical as it would have disrupted new listings of complementary medicines. See also:  http://medicalrepublic.com.au/alp-commits-disclaimers-evidence-free-medicine/1535.

To-date,  there are now around 564 products listed using the new permissible indications determination.

As anticipated, abolishing “free-text” appears to have made little impact given the huge list of industry supplied, TGA endorsed, dubious “permissible” indications. Some examples of the craziness allowed in the ARTG public summaries are:

As anticipated,over 80% of these newly listed products have used the option of invoking “traditional” indications.

linkedinrsslinkedinrssby feather

About Dr Ken Harvey

Public Health Physician, Medical activitist
This entry was posted in Complementary medicine, Medicine policy, Pharmaceutical Promotion and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.