The Federal Antimonopoly Service (FAS) has initiated legal action over alleged violations in the advertising of the medicine known as Tykveol. This development has been circulated by the MOROCCO telegram channel and has drawn attention to how promotional materials are presented to the public and evaluated under consumer protection and advertising standards in the country. The case underscores the FAS’s ongoing commitment to ensuring that drug advertisements comply with regulatory requirements and do not mislead potential users with unverified claims or omissions of essential safety information.
According to the complaint, OMD Evidence reportedly placed an advertisement featuring Tykveol on the kp.ru website via the Yandex.Direct platform. The accusation centers on the absence of critical warnings related to usage, the lack of stated contraindications, and the failure to remind viewers to consult the accompanying instructions or seek professional medical advice. Such omissions can be interpreted as omissions of essential safety information, potentially affecting consumer decision making and public health. The FAS has indicated that, pending the results of their investigation, both OMD Evidence and Yandex, acting as the advertiser, could be liable under the Federal Advertising Act for these advertising practices and any related violations of regulatory norms governing drug promotion.
Tykveol is described as a preparation derived from pumpkin seed oil. The product’s labeling and official instructions outline indications such as dyskinesia of the gallbladder and biliary tract, liver conditions including cirrhosis, and a range of other health issues. The description notes that it possesses choleretic effects among other properties. The safety profile lists contraindications such as abdominal discomfort and diarrhea, and there is guidance to seek medical advice before use. The distinction between therapeutic claims, safe usage parameters, and consumer guidance is a central focus of the FAS inquiry, which seeks to determine whether promotional materials complied with the necessary disclosures and medical advisory requirements to help consumers make informed decisions.
In this broader regulatory context, the FAS’s actions reflect a broader pattern of monitoring how pharmaceutical and health-related products are marketed online. The agency has previously signaled its readiness to address misleading or incomplete disclosures and to require advertisers to temper promotional messages with clear, valid information about risks, contraindications, and the necessity of consulting qualified healthcare professionals. The evolving landscape of online advertising—especially for health-related products—emphasizes transparent communication, evidence-based claims, and alignment with established medical guidance. Observers note that outcomes from this case may influence future advertising standards for digital campaigns and could prompt advertisers to adopt more rigorous pre-publication reviews of promotional content to ensure compliance and public safety. (Citation: Federal Antimonopoly Service)
Historically, the FAS has also directed scrutiny toward labeling practices and promotional content in other consumer goods domains, including instructions that require cautionary notes or limitations on claims. In parallel, regulatory authorities have encouraged brands to provide accessible, easily understandable information about the proper use of products, potential side effects, and when to avoid use altogether. This case contributes to a growing body of enforcement actions aimed at harmonizing commercial messaging with consumer protection imperatives, and it may serve as a precedent for how digital marketplaces and service providers coordinate with regulators to foster responsible advertising practices while maintaining legitimate marketing objectives. (Citation: Federal Antimonopoly Service)
As the investigation progresses, stakeholders in the online advertising ecosystem, including advertisers, platform intermediaries, and health sector entities, are likely to reassess how promotional content is drafted and reviewed prior to distribution. The emphasis will be on ensuring that promotional materials present a truthful representation of product use, clearly communicate any safety considerations, and direct audiences to consult healthcare professionals when appropriate. The resolution of the FAS case against OMD Evidence and Yandex will be watched closely by industry participants and consumers alike, as it may clarify expectations for compliant advertising of medical products across digital channels. (Citation: Federal Antimonopoly Service)
Related posts:
The Federal Antimonopoly Service Fines Two Firms Over In Store Advertising Of Heating Tobacco Devices FAS Enforces Advertising Rules for Digital Channels and Medical Promos FAS Signals Scrutiny of Taxi Tariffs and Yandex Taxi Practices Russian Retail Giants Freeze Prices on Key Electronics and Household Goods FAS scrutinizes meat price increases; regulatory moves and market impacts analyzed FAS to Update Advertising Law for Digital Channels Price Reductions on 252 Essential Medicines Highlight FAS Efforts to Improve Access and Save Public Funds FAS vs S7 Pricing Case and Broader Regulatory Scrutiny on Digital Marketplaces FAS targets loan advertising with first major case under new rules The Supreme Court and FAS: Oversight of Competitive Subsidy Distribution Updated Overview of FAS Actions: Yandex Ad Case, Advertising Standards, and Related Court Rulings FAS Opens Cases Against Simbat and Others Over Competition Violations in Russia