In accordance with the requirements of the National Council of the Order of Physicians and after reading the article published in the medical journal "Le Concours Médical" on April 8, 2000 (see below), and certain articles (see below) of the medical code of ethics concerning advertising and the obligations imposed on the initiator of a medical Internet site to display his name.
Text published in the journal "Le concours Médical" under the title Deontology and the Internet
In addition to the fact that any direct or indirect advertising remains prohibited, the doctor must, in accordance with article 13 of the code of ethics, "report only confirmed data, exercise caution and be mindful of the repercussions of his statements on the public". The first requirement therefore relates to the quality of the information. Furthermore, the implementation of a medical information server engages the responsibility of its promoter; the name of the sponsoring physician must appear clearly. Finally, the independence of the doctor producing the information must be respected and he remains responsible for medical confidentiality. Since Internet transmissions do not offer all the guarantees of confidentiality, the doctor must ensure that no personal medical information circulates or is recorded on the server.
All the recommendations are available on the order's website:
The same advertising intentions are found in directories (art. 80), whether it is that of France Télécom, the minitel, or any other intended for the public, and even certain professional directories distributed regardless of the medium ( INTERNET, for example) by intermediary organizations (pharmaceutical laboratories, professional equipment manufacturers, associations, unions). Equity requires that each practitioner be treated in the same way; advertising for some results in discrimination against others.
Code of Medical Ethics, Article 13
When a doctor takes part in a public information action of an educational or health nature, whatever the means of dissemination, he must only report confirmed data, exercise caution and be mindful of the repercussions of his remarks on the public. He must avoid any advertising attitude on this occasion, whether personal, in favour of the organisations in which he works or to which he lends his support, or in favour of a cause which is not of general interest.
he will not mention his address but his phone number:
Code of Medical Ethics, Article 19
Medicine should not be practiced as a business.
All direct or indirect advertising methods are prohibited, in particular any development or signage giving the premises a commercial appearance.
Public Health Code, article L. 551-3
Advertising to the public for a medicinal product is only permitted on condition that the medicinal product is not subject to a medical prescription, that it is not reimbursable by compulsory health insurance schemes and that the marketing authorisation or registration does not contain restrictions on advertising to the public due to a possible risk to public health. However, advertising campaigns for vaccines or medicinal products referred to in Article L. 355-30 may be aimed at the public. Advertising to the public for a medicinal product must necessarily be accompanied by a message of caution and a referral to consult a doctor if symptoms persist.
The independence of the doctor producing information must be respected. Any contract binding the doctor in his professional practice must be communicated to the Order.
It is essential that the user be informed of the context in which the medical information is provided. Any promotional or advertising contribution must be clearly identified and presented as such. The financial promoters of medical sites must be clearly identified and any conflicts of interest highlighted.
3. Direct and indirect advertising methods
As specified in Articles 13,19,20, 13, XNUMX, any "advertisement" is prohibited, whether it comes from the doctor himself or from the organizations to which he is directly or indirectly linked, or for which he works (hospitals, "centers", "institutes", etc.). His participation in informing the public must be measured (Art. XNUMX), and the personality of the doctor, who can enhance the educational message, must fade into the background in favor of this message without being accompanied by details on his practice (type, place, conditions).
Does this mean that a doctor can never address the public? No, because health education is part of the doctor's mission (art. 12). A competent doctor cannot be criticized for providing scientific explanations to the public. This requires prudence and rigor, and the doctor who does so must carefully protect himself, in substance and in form, from any suspicion of publicity.
Report adopted at the session of 28 January 2000
Doctor Aline MARCELLI
Article 19
Medicine should not be practiced as a business.
Article 20
The doctor must be careful about the use made of his name, his position or his statements.
He must not tolerate that the organizations, public or private, in which he works or to which he lends his assistance use his name or his professional activity for advertising purposes.
This article underlines the personal nature of the doctor's responsibility, already mentioned in the different but related areas of communication (art.13) and advertising drift (art.19) and taken up again later, with regard to article 69.
1. Individual advertising or misleading information
It appears in many circumstances, often in seemingly innocuous forms.
The information may be accurate (cards informing individual GPs of the installation of a specialist) but be extended (to the public, to associations) without justification. The same applies when holidays and absences are inserted in newspapers and in reality constitute pretexts for making people talk about oneself. This information must be communicated in advance to the departmental council of the Order (art. 82).
The information may be accurate but excessive, taking on an advertising connotation in form: this is the case of professional plaques whose dimensions exceed the traditional ones of 25 x 30 cm (art.81), are transformed into real signs, multiply under various pretexts or are accompanied by abusive signage of the medical practice.
The same applies to the wording of the plate as well as that of the ordinances (art.79) and the frequent use of unauthorized titles, because they encourage confusion between easy-to-acquire diplomas and real qualifications, or relate to fragmentary aspects of the activity. The same advertising intentions are found in directories (art.80), whether they are those of France Télécom, the Minitel, or any other intended for the public, and even certain professional directories distributed regardless of the medium ( INTERNET , for example) by intermediary organizations (pharmaceutical laboratories, professional equipment manufacturers, associations, unions). Equity requires that each practitioner be treated in the same way; advertising for some results in discrimination against others.
The name, the quality (qualifications, characteristics of practice, attributions, responsibilities, functions) cannot be mentioned without the agreement of the person concerned. Any inaccurate information is therefore his responsibility and, depending on its nature or mode of expression, becomes faulty.
Information may be misleading, either in itself (qualitatively or quantitatively), or because it perpetuates a situation or data that has changed and has not been corrected. It may also be misleading – most often indirectly – through presentation (document intended for customers, local newspaper, municipal brochure), through the globalization to a group (professional or non-professional associations, practice companies) of data normally limited to one or a few members. It may also be misleading through the ambiguity seen in the wording of plaques or ordinances, or the abusive use of certain terms ("centre" of..., "college" of..., "institute" of...).
It is therefore essential that the doctor "ensure the use that is made of his name, his capacity". This same concern must guide him with regard to "his declarations": the wrongful errors are situated in a context where the doctor, until now, did not have sufficient means to ensure that third parties respect the obligation thus imposed on him by Article 20. This must therefore be considered mainly in relation to these third parties to whom he may be linked due to the terms of his practice.