Within aesthetic medicine, several Russian pharmaceutical companies are recognized for quality products, yet many practitioners still favor imported options, including items that enter markets through parallel import channels. This stance was echoed in a conversation with socialbites.ca by Alexei Ermakov, who serves as Deputy Director General of INGAL and participates in the interdepartmental working group under the Ministry of Industry and Trade that focuses on expanding the production of medicines and medical devices within the Russian Federation. The exchange highlighted a tension between domestic capability and international supply lines that shapes daily practice in beauty clinics.
Ermakov emphasized that permitting parallel imports at the state level may undercut the growth of domestic producers by fostering the belief among cosmetologists that foreign products are easier to obtain and potentially more dependable. The outcome, he argued, is not only competition but a risk of introducing counterfeit goods into clinical settings. This concern touches not only on brand prestige but also on patient safety and trust in local manufacturing capacities.
From his perspective, the broader impact on the industry is considerable. Clinicians and even distributors may lose confidence about whether shipments of medications and materials have been transported and stored under proper conditions. Such doubt can ripple through the supply chain, affecting treatment timelines and the consistency of patient outcomes.
For example, he noted how products based on biopolymers such as hyaluronic acid and polylactic acid require careful temperature control during transit and storage. If temperatures rise above modest thresholds, the integrity of these substances may deteriorate in irreversible ways. Likewise, gel formulations used for injections demand strict handling; exposure to cold temperatures or freezing can compromise their safety and effectiveness. These specifics matter because they directly influence patient comfort during procedures and the risk profile for postprocedural inflammation.
The interview also revealed a perception gap around Russian-made solutions. Consumers and professionals alike often harbor skepticism about locally produced items, a sentiment that can hinder market penetration for high-quality domestic offerings. The narrative suggests that many clinicians historically preferred familiar European, American, or Korean brands, and recognition and trust for Russian developers lag behind those well-known names. In practice, this means many specialists continue to rely on established products, even when domestic options are capable of competing on quality and performance.
Ermakov pointed to a broader potential upside for Russia. He asserted that some Russian pharmaceuticals may actually rival or surpass foreign analogues when high standards of innovation and rigorous research underpin their development. He cited investment in polylactic acid technology—a program that underwent extensive study and testing. The result is a formulation delivered via microspheres with carefully controlled size and a uniform structure, designed to minimize pain during procedures and reduce the risk of inflammation. According to him, such advances contribute to greater safety for patients and more efficient experiences for clinicians, illustrating how local investment can translate into practical clinical benefits.
The conversation also touched on the possible consequences of counterfeit products in cosmetic medicine. The presence of fake or substandard items can pose serious risks to patient health, eroding trust in all drug delivery systems and complicating clinical decision making for practitioners who bear the responsibility of patient safety. This reality underscores the need for stringent quality controls, transparent supply chains, and robust regulatory oversight to ensure that every material used in aesthetic procedures—from injectables to supportive devices—meets established safety and efficacy standards.
In sum, the discussion sheds light on the delicate balance between encouraging domestic industry growth and maintaining access to a steady supply of trusted products. It also emphasizes that meticulous handling across the entire lifecycle of a drug or device—from production to transport to storage—helps preserve quality, protect patients, and support practitioners in delivering consistent, high-standard care.