Healthy Skepticism Library item: 1117

Warning: This library includes all items relevant to health product marketing that we are aware of regardless of quality. Often we do not agree with all or part of the contents.

Publication type: news

Frisch D.
Media May Mislead on Drug Study Stories
Reuters Health 2003 May 9

Full text:

NEW YORK (Reuters Health) – News reports about newly available prescription drugs are often incomplete and unbalanced, according an analysis of Canadian newspapers. The findings suggest that consumers need to be more skeptical about what they read as a consequence, the researchers said.

Researchers, led by Alan Cassels of the School of Health Information Sciences at the University of Victoria in British Columbia, found that newspaper stories often overemphasized the benefits of drugs, and many articles did not adequately address the risks associated with taking the drug.

Furthermore, according to the study released this week by the Canadian Center for Policy Alternatives, when information was provided regarding benefits and harms, it was quantified in only one in four articles, and in 26 percent of these it was ‘misleading.’

‘Misinformation and biased information leads to overuse and inappropriate use of drugs,’ said Cassels in an interview with Reuters Health. He explained that the situation is ‘worse’ in the US, where direct-to-consumer advertising of prescription drugs is legal.

Just over two-thirds of stories did not mention any side effects, and in those that did discuss harms, they were often in the bottom half of the article. Contraindications were mentioned in only 4 percent of cases, and the financial ties to drug manufacturers of individuals giving testimonials about the drug were often not disclosed.

‘People have to be much more skeptical about what they read in the media and they need to judge things based on independent and objective sources,’ said Cassels. The report provides a list of resources for journalists and consumers to consult for such information.

The study analyzed all articles from the year 2000 written about Pfizer Inc.‘s arthritis drug Celebrex (celecoxib), Pfizer’s cholesterol-lowering drug Lipitor (atorvastatin), Eli Lilly & Co.‘s osteoporosis drug Evista (raloxifene), Roche’s influenza drug Tamiflu (oseltamivir) and Eisai Co.

Ltd.‘s Alzheimer’s disease drug Aricept (donepezil).

All of the drugs had been on the Canadian market for less than five years and had received what the researchers described as ‘a high degree of media attention.’ The 193 articles studied were culled from the 24 daily newspapers that had the greatest circulation in Canada.

Cassels told Reuters Health that he suspected that stories in other media, such as television, would show similar inaccuracies because ‘the same pressures are there to get out a story.’ He points out that a study conducted in 2000 analyzing the U.S. media found similar reporting errors.

The impetus for the study, Cassels explained, came from conversations with focus groups in which people indicated that the media was the major source of information on prescription drugs after physicians and pharmacists.

‘I hope this ramps up the level of skepticism for journalists and for consumers who rely on newspapers, which many people consider to be trusted sources of information,’ he said.