OUR DRUGS FIX EVERYTHING

Our Drugs Fix Everything

Picture this. It’s late at night and you’re stressed out. Maybe you’re having difficulty sleeping or maybe your sexual performance isn’t what it used to be. You turn on the television to pass some time and there it is. A commercial is showing you the answer to all your problems! Your situation is about to change for the better… or is it? Lunesta® and Viagra® are just a couple of examples of companies that practice direct-to-consumer advertising. More examples can be found HERE (sorry for the poor quality).

Direct-to-consumer pharmaceutical advertising (DTCPA) can be defined as “an effort… made by a pharmaceutical company to promote its prescription product directly to patients” (Ventola, 2011). This is commonly practiced in the United States of America and New Zealand, but is currently prohibited in Canada. This generates a problem for Canadians because American-made television and North American edition magazines, that are created in the USA with DTCPA, can both be consumed by the Canadian population. Further, in the examples given above, the companies attempting to sell their product are biased. They are selling you a product that directly affects your health, but as a business, their main goal is to make profit. How do you, the consumer, know which advertisements you can trust when trying to optimize your health. The controversies surrounding DTCPA make it an extremely important social issue.

Before we can make an informed decision on DTCPA, we must understand both sides of the debate. DTCPA drives up the price of prescription drugs as consumers become willing to spend more money for brand name drugs. This also results in in pharmaceutical companies putting large amounts of money into advertising that would otherwise go into research. Doctors have also been proven more likely to prescribe a drug when a patiently specifically requested it (“Direct-to-consumer Advertising,” 2011). Not only does this increase the likelihood of a patient receiving less suitable medication, but DTCPA also encourages healthy patients to think they would be better off with medication. Lastly, DTCPA generates a “focus on blockbuster and lifestyle drugs [that] excludes provision of information to traditionally ignored at-risk groups, such as pediatric patients, pregnant women, and orphan disease patients” (Liang and Mackey, 2011). At the end of the day, the pharmaceutical companies can make the most money by appealing to the masses, instead of catering to specific subpopulations.

If after that you’re thinking to yourself, “we need to protect ourselves against direct-to-consumer pharmaceutical advertising,” consider the following. “The number of regulatory actions taken by the FDA against companies marketing prescription drugs to consumers has fallen dramatically in recent years” (Donohue et al., 2007). Although many argue that this proves a fault with the FDA, it could also be suggestive of better compliance with pharmaceutical companies following FDA advertising regulations. Many individuals may not know that there is a problem or solution until viewing advertisements for different medications. DTCPA can spark important conversations between patients and clinicians or health care providers. This can result in a reduction of underdiagnosed and undertreated conditions as well as the encouragement of patient compliance (Ventola, 2011). Random surveys of the US public conducted in the late 90’s revealed that 20-25% of the respondents had seen advertisements for drugs they were currently taking. Of those, 33% said the ads made them more likely to take their medication (Mintzes, 2006). This means that DTCPA makes patients more likely to follow instructions given to them by a medical professional and it’s hard to interpret that in a negative light.

Personally, I am not in favour of direct-to-consumer pharmaceutical advertising. I strongly believe that important decisions, such as which medications a patient takes, should be made by a medical professional. I don’t like the idea of a doctor’s decision being swayed by a patient who specifically requests a drug. Doctors may feel that this will lead to better patient compliance, but it can actually result in the patient receiving less than premium care. Pharmaceutical companies are also less likely to state the risks while generating appealing advertisements. Vioxx (advertisement seen above) was withdrawn in 2004 after it was discovered to elevate the risk of heart attack and stroke (Tman, 2017). This drug used a celebrity figure (Dorothy Hamill) and a catchy slogan (“For everyday victories”), but undersold the risks of taking their drug. This advertisement encourages disease mongering as it suggests that the undiagnosed pain the consumer may be feeling can be cured with this “magic bullet” drug. As a result, the health of many individuals suffered based on these advertisements. At the end of the day, these pharmaceutical companies are businesses and their primary interest is not in patient well-being, but turning a strong profit. I am in support of Canada’s current decision to prohibit direct-to-consumer pharmaceutical advertisement and I hope this policy remains in place for the foreseeable future.

For an excellent video that further weighs the pros and cons on this issue, watch: How Americans got stuck with endless drug ads.

RESCUE

Direct-to-consumer Advertising: Canadian Federation of Nurses Unions Backgrounder [WWW Document], 2011. URL https://deslibris-ca.proxy.queensu.ca/ID/248608 (accessed 11.13.18).

Donohue, J.M., Cevasco, M., Rosenthal, M.B., 2007. A Decade of Direct-to-Consumer Advertising of Prescription Drugs. The New England Journal of Medicine; Boston 357, 673–81. http://dx.doi.org.proxy.queensu.ca/10.1056/NEJMsa070502

Liang, B.A., Mackey, T., 2011. Reforming direct-to-consumer advertising. Nature Biotechnology 29, 397–400. https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.1865

Mintzes, B., 2006. Direct-to-Consumer Advertising of Prescription Drugs in Canada [WWW Document]. URL https://deslibris-ca.proxy.queensu.ca/ID/203599 (accessed 11.13.18).

Tman, Z., 2017. Here’s why direct-to-consumer drug ads need FDA oversight [WWW Document]. KevinMD.com. URL https://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2017/12/heres-direct-consumer-drug-ads-need-fda-oversight.html (accessed 11.13.18).

Ventola, C.L., 2011. Direct-to-Consumer Pharmaceutical Advertising. P T 36, 669–684.