June 11, 2025 — The Economic Times reports that a prominent pharmaceutical industry association has urged the Union Health Ministry to reconsider its directive that bars medical representatives (MRs) from physically meeting doctors in central government hospitals. The industry argues that the move could restrict vital information flow and undermine drug accessibility, especially in remote regions.
This reaction comes just days after the Directorate General of Health Services (DGHS), through a circular dated June 4, 2025, issued a policy prohibiting in-person MR interactions in government hospitals. Instead, it mandates that all product-related communication occur via digital means—email or secure portals.
While some may see this as a step toward dismantling the traditional MR role, that interpretation misses the point.
In my view, this is not about eliminating medical representatives. It’s about transforming their role to match the ethical, digital, and scientific expectations of modern healthcare.
A System Already Poised for Change:
For decades, medical reps have been the primary channel through which pharmaceutical companies reached doctors—armed with product samples, promotional material, and persuasion tactics. In a market dominated by branded generics, this model shaped prescribing patterns significantly.
But the rules of the game are changing.
Doctors today demand data, not just messaging. Patients expect affordability and transparency. Regulators are watching. And the public increasingly values ethics over incentives in medical decision-making.
The DGHS circular doesn’t disrupt an efficient system—it corrects an imbalance that had gone unaddressed for far too long.
The Realities Behind Branded Generics:
Branded generics – off-patent drugs sold under specific brand names – make up over 70% of India’s domestic pharma market. These are often promoted aggressively through MRs, which:
- Reinforces prescriber loyalty to brands
- Contributes to higher out-of-pocket costs for patients
- Distorts rational prescribing by emphasizing brand recall over clinical evidence
While these drugs have expanded access, the promotional tactics surrounding them need a serious reset.
Patented Drugs and the Innovation Dilemma:
At the other end are patented drugs – cutting-edge, research-driven therapies. These often remain inaccessible due to cost, late launches, and barriers in public procurement.
India’s Section 3(d) of the Patent Act rightly filters out frivolous patents, curbing “evergreening” strategies. But challenges around access, affordability, and information persist—even with innovative treatments.
In both generics and patented drugs, the way pharma communicates with doctors has come under scrutiny – and rightfully so.
The DGHS Directive: A Paradigm Shift:
The DGHS ban marks a fundamental policy shift, especially in government healthcare institutions that serve millions. Its goals are clear:
- Ensure doctors’ prescribing decisions remain scientifically neutral
- Reduce brand-driven influence in public hospitals
- Promote evidence-based and peer-reviewed sources of drug information
This is not an anti-industry move. It’s a pro-patient, pro-transparency, and pro-science correction.
Not the End – but the Reinvention – of Medical Reps:
Let me say it plainly:
This is not the end of medical representatives. It is the beginning of their evolution.
The policy signals that the old “brand-push” model is obsolete—but the need for credible, well-trained, scientifically literate pharma liaisons remains stronger than ever.
What the New MR Must Look Like:
- From Pitch to Precision:
Reps must transition from product promoters to scientific communicators—sharing real-world evidence, safety data, and treatment comparisons. - From Doorstep to Digital:
With hospitals restricting physical visits, MRs must now master digital communication tools—email, webinars, and secure doctor platforms. - From Prescription Goals to Knowledge Sharing:
Companies should measure reps on their ability to engage ethically, not push volume. Focus must shift to educational impact. - From Influence to Integrity:
Upskilling in medical writing, therapeutic areas, and regulatory guidelines can reposition MRs as Medical Science Liaisons (MSLs) or digital medical educators.
Pharma’s Call to Action:
To thrive in this changing landscape, companies must:
- Launch non-promotional CME programs
- Organize hospital-approved scientific sessions
- Build secure, compliant digital channels
- Train MRs in ethical engagement, clinical literacy, and communication skills
- Collaborate with medical councils and regulators to rebuild trust
Conclusion:
Industry resistance is expected. But clinging to outdated methods won’t work in a system demanding credibility over convenience.
The DGHS directive is not a crackdown. It’s a wake-up call. A moment to reflect, restructure, and reimagine how pharma and medicine should interact in a digital-first, ethics-forward India.
Medical representatives are not being shown the door. They are being shown a new direction—toward greater respect, responsibility, and relevance.
The future of pharma lies not in access at any cost, but in engagement with integrity.
By: Tapan J. Ray
Disclaimer: The views/opinions expressed in this article are entirely my own, written in my individual and personal capacity. I do not represent any other person or organization for this opinion.