The tug-of-war between upstream manufacturers and downstream medical aesthetic institutions is coming to light.

Puliya recently issued a statement via its official Weibo account, naming several medical institutions—including Anhui Hefei Hanmei Plastic Surgery Hospital and So Young Youth Clinic—as "unauthorized partners." The company claimed these institutions procured products through unofficial channels, raising concerns about authenticity and safety due to lack of professional training for medical staff.

In response, So Young Youth Clinic defended its practices, stating that all Puliya products used were legally sourced from licensed medical device suppliers and could be verified via China’s National Medical Products Administration (NMPA) UDI (Unique Device Identification) system. The clinic emphasized its compliance with ISO 37301 standards and proper medical licensing.

So Young also criticized upstream manufacturers for imposing restrictive conditions like "official certification" and "designated channels," arguing that such practices manipulate pricing and undermine institutional autonomy. The clinic condemned what it called "false safety claims" used to damage reputations and disrupt fair competition.

Industry observers see this clash as a battle over pricing power in China’s rapidly growing medical aesthetics market, where unauthorized product sales remain a persistent issue.

**Pricing Wars** The market for regenerative aesthetic treatments, including "baby face" injections, has surged. While demand grows, prices remain high—often exceeding ¥10,000 per dose. So Young’s aggressive pricing strategy, offering treatments at a fraction of standard rates (e.g., ¥2,999 for its "Miracle Baby Face 3.0"), has drawn backlash from manufacturers like Puliya and Changchun Saint-Biomaterial, which demanded product removals.

So Young CEO Jin Xing argues that affordable pricing is key to combating illegal clinics, which now outnumber licensed ones in China. He attributes the rise of "black market" aesthetics to inflated prices driving consumers toward unregulated providers.

**Compliance Debate** Critics question So Young’s sourcing practices, alleging unauthorized use of Class III medical devices. Manufacturers stress that proper cold-chain logistics and traceability are critical for product safety, yet unauthorized resellers often bypass these requirements.

Legal experts note that under China’s Medical Device Supervision and Administration Regulations, institutions must procure devices from authorized suppliers and maintain verifiable records. Violations can result in fines or license revocations.

**Broader Industry Challenges** The conflict highlights deeper issues: rampant counterfeit products, lax platform oversight, and weak enforcement. While brands advise consumers to verify authorized clinics and check anti-counterfeit labels, sophisticated fakes (e.g., refilled genuine packaging) remain a challenge.

Experts call for stronger regulation, consumer education, and stiffer penalties to curb illegal sales. However, lasting solutions require collaboration among manufacturers, clinics, and regulators to prioritize patient safety and industry integrity.