Why IMA opposed the Bill

• It’s not National as it does not represent all states. Vice chancellors are appointed by Governors and not states. 
• It’s not Medical as it mixes Ayush with modern medicine. Combining Ayush with modern medicine will be a trial and therefore Ayush doctors will leave Ayush, and Ayush mixed with modern medicine will be a potential threat to patients.
• It’s not a Commission as it has no provision for developmental grant.
• It’s not Representative as there is no representation of doctors from every state.
• It’s not Community-friendly: Medical education will become costly, patients redressal with commission against state medical council order will go.
• It’s undemocratic: The proposed commission will include mostly nominated central government members.
• It will increase corruption: Powers only with three members in board; commission has only appellant powers, MAR board to have one non medical member, only 0-40% seats will have fee restriction, fine from 1/2 to 10 times, full powers to central government.  
• It is non MBBS-friendly: Those students who pass by grace and fail in licentiate exam will not be allowed to practice. It’s something like you pass the test series but if you fail in one T 20 match; you are out of cricket for that year. Imagine a girl getting married who has passed MBBS but cannot practice  
• It’s not evidence-based: Mixing of Ayush with modern medicine is not evidence-based medicine.
• It’s not autonomous as the commission has regulatory as well as directional powers.
• It’s not IMA friendly: As all stakeholders have not been called for discussions.

IMA National President has given a call to end the strike. 

IMA hopes that the standing committee will award a patient audience to IMA to take care of all objections of the Association to the Bill.

Dr KK Aggarwal

Padma Shri Awardee Vice President CMAAO Group Editor-in-chief IJCP Publications

President Heart Care Foundation of India

Immediate Past National President IMA