Pharmaceuticals--Health Care Costs--Ads

[yellowwood]

I would like to ban pharmaceutical ads from television. The fact that they are so ever-present indicates that the ads work and that there are great profits in pushing these various drugs. It's just not logical to have patients demanding certain drugs from their doctors. The patients' knowledge about them consists of what they learn from ads. Medicare and insurance is paying for this pooled ignorance. Obviously, from the many counter-indications that they list, there are often side-effects that then result from their use.
I believe that healthcare costs would come down if television ads couldn't push drugs.

[tavalon]

1. They also shouldn't be able to market their wares directly to Doctors

by giving free samples to Doctor's offices. Of course, I would rather we had universal health care before that well dries up as many poor people are able to get some medications free by getting samples from their doctor.

[Vinca]

3. I don't mind them giving free samples out, but I do mind them

arranging for the shipment of free samples from a luxury cruise or a private island in the Bahamas. I also object to big pharma having anything to do with continuing education. Currently, they provide doctors with most of the continuing ed which means they get to pimp their drugs for hours on end, usually from a beach in South Florida. Send the free samples out ONCE with a little brochure explaining the product and that should be the end of it.

[Clear Blue Sky]

10. Free samples are very helpful when trying a new medicine and

it may avoid a huge cost to the patient. Not a good idea getting rid of them.

[tavalon]

13. You do realize that the doctor prescribes the newest and most expensive

drugs because those are the ones advertised in his/her free sample cabinet, right?

[Clear Blue Sky]

18. Not necessarily.

[tabbycat31]

2. I have a better proposal

any drug that wants to be covered under Medicare part D and receive government money must not advertise on TV. This would kill 90% of the drug ads.

FWIW I agree 100% but put some $$ incentive in it.

[sinkingfeeling]

4. I remember a time when pharmaceutical companies were banned from direct advertisement to

consumers. It changed in the 1980's? Another gift from St. Ronnie?

[TheMightyFavog]

8. I remebr the first TV spots coming on in the mid 90s.

IIRC, it was something the Clinton Administration did.

Not one of Big Dog's shining moments. :(

[sinkingfeeling]

11. I remember when there were no print ads for them. The FDA allowed those in the 1980's. TV ads came

into being in 1997. As of 2006, the USA is the only country to allow direct-to-consumer advertising.

http://www.fda.gov/ola/2003/AdvertisingofPrescriptionDrugs0722.htmlAt

Prior to the early 1980s, prescription products were not promoted directly to consumers and patients. At that time, FDA’s regulation of promotional drug material was limited to that which manufacturers prepared to present to physicians and other health care professionals. In the early 1980s, a few companies began advertising products directly to patient audiences (specifically, older people concerned about pneumonia and people taking prescription ibuprofen to treat arthritis pain). As questions and concerns directed to the Agency about such DTC promotion began to grow, FDA issued a policy statement on September 2, 1983, requesting a voluntary moratorium on DTC ads. The Agency needed time to study whether the current regulations developed in the 1960s for prescription drug advertising directed toward health care professionals provided sufficient safeguards to protect consumers when applied to DTC promotion. In addition, the Agency wanted to allow time for a dialogue among consumers, health professionals, and industry, and for interested parties to conduct research on aspects of consumer-oriented advertising. The industry complied with the request. In 1984, the University of Illinois and Stanford Research Institute jointly sponsored a symposium to discuss consumer-directed prescription drug advertising from a broad research and policy perspective.

In a September 9, 1985, Federal Register (FR) Notice (50 FR 36677), FDA concluded that the “current regulations governing prescription drug advertising provide sufficient safeguards to protect consumers,” which lifted the voluntary moratorium.

http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/97/24/1806

But social scientists and other observers remain divided over the impact on consumer behavior of direct-to-consumer advertising, which first appeared as print advertisements in the mid-1980s and on radio and TV in 1997.

Beginning in January 2006, the United States will be the only country that allows direct-to-consumer drug advertising for pharmaceuticals. (New Zealand allows such ads through the end of 2005.)


Edited

[Nevilledog]

5. The ads are entertaining though.

Gotta love the possible side-effects listings at the end of these ads. What exactly IS an "oily-discharge"? Have you ever noticed that for most of the pharma ads you can't really figure out WHAT the drug is for? Except for the Viagra-type drugs...those are easy to understand.

[yellowwood]

7. Side Effects

Do you ever notice that the some ads are hardly long enough to accommodate all of the warnings? This one for Abilfy is an example:

"Abilify is not for use in psychotic conditions that are related to dementia. Abilify may cause heart failure, sudden death, or pneumonia in older adults with dementia-related conditions. Stop using Abilify and call your doctor at once if you have the following symptoms: fever with stiff muscles and rapid heart rate; uncontrolled muscle movements; symptoms that come on suddenly such as numbness or weakness, severe headache, and problems with vision, speech, or balance. Abilify can cause side effects that may impair your thinking or reactions. Be careful if you drive or do anything that requires you to be awake and alert. Avoid drinking alcohol, which can increase some of the side effects of Abilify.
Before you take aripiprazole, tell your doctor if you regularly use other medicines that make you sleepy (such as cold or allergy medicine, narcotic pain medicine, sleeping pills, muscle relaxers, and medicine for seizures, depression, or anxiety). They can add to sleepiness caused by Abilify."

One has to believe that people actually ask for this drug or it wouldn't be advertised. I'll bet it's expensive, too.

[raccoon]

6. Me too. They make doctors into pushers and encourage patients to nag their doctors for drugs. nt

[Mz Pip]

9. I read somewhere that the pharm companies

spend more money on advertizing than they do on research. That pretty much did it for me in solidifying my opposition to drug advertizing.

[PA Democrat]

16. Estimate is they spend more than twice as much on marketing as on research.

http://www.cbc.ca/consumer/story/2008/01/03/drugs.html

The US and New Zealand are the only 2 developed countries that allow direct marketing to consumers. So when you hear the talking point that the reason that drugs are so much cheaper in Canada is because of how much US drug companies spend on R&D, it's pure BS.

[lmn84]

12. I actually am in school with pharma

I'm going to school in pharmaceutical technology and have worked temporarily as a technician. Guess what? Most doctors don't even know the name of generic drugs, they ALWAYS prescribe the brand name. These ads really don't make much of a difference though, because when you take your prescription in to be filled, most pharmacies will automatically fill it with the generic if one is available, even if the prescription is written for the brand name. There are only 2 instances where pharmacies won't fill with generic, and that's if the brand is requested by the doctor or patient. In my own personal experience of working at a pharmacy that fills about 300+ prescriptions a day (which is a lot), that happens about once a week.

Medicare, at least in the state that I work and go to school in, WILL NOT cover brand name drugs unless the doctor has written them an explanation on why it must be a brand name drug. And in that instance it's typically because the patient has problems with the generic (occasionally a generic will be slightly different from a brand, and once in a blue moon that causes issues).

The TV ads are truly just a big waste of money, because in the end the majority of the time you will still receive generic, even if you were prescribed brand name.

[Telly Savalas]

17. But isn't it the case that most drugs advertised on TV are still under patent

and no generic equivalent is available?

[sad sally]

14. Amen, yellowwood...ban 'em

My sweet husband sez' if he has to listen/watch another "weiner cream/pill" ad on the tv he's going to go crazy - enough already.

[Raine]

15. I HATE those ads

notice how often the side-effects are as serious as strokes or even death but they gloss over those real fast. :mad: