Healthy Skepticism Library item: 1330

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

Jack I.
Ottawa could permit prescription drug ads
National Post 2003 Jul 3

Full text:

OTTAWA – The federal government is considering allowing pharmaceutical companies to advertise prescription drugs — a move media companies say could bring them $400-million in new revenue.

Broadcast and print media have been pressing for years to run prescription drug ads, which is illegal for many drugs and so circumscribed for others as to be nearly pointless.

One of the only prescription drugs advertised on Canadian TV is Viagra.

The ad shows a happy man dancing down the street in the morning, and flashes the name Viagra. But nowhere does it indicate what the man’s problem is or what Viagra does. That’s because doing either is against the law. Luckily for Pfizer Inc., the manufacturer, Viagra has received enough free media coverage that most people can make sense of the ad — or they’ve seen U.S. ads.

“Viagra is the perfect example of how porous our system has become,” said Glen O’Farrell, president of the Canadian Association of Broadcasters. “It basically ridicules our system. It’s high time that we look at this, that we take our heads out of the sand.”

Health Canada is considering lifting the restrictions as part of a review of the Food and Drug Act and other other health statutes, according to background documents posted on its Web site.

Some health organizations oppose the move, saying consumers will then pressure their physicians to prescribe drugs they don’t need.

Among industrialized countries, only the United States and New Zealand allow prescription drug advertising, said Tara Mulligan, a Health Canada spokeswoman.

Government rules divide prescription drugs into two categories. Schedule A drugs treat conditions such as cancer and obesity and cannot be advertised at all. Other drugs, such as Viagra, can be advertised but without mentioning the condition they treat.

There are other rules limiting the claims advertisers can make about such non-prescription drugs as over-the-counter painkillers. Canadian law also forbids mentioning the potential health benefits of foods, which is why orange juice containers may boast “additional calcium” but don’t say why you should care.

The government documents make it clear legalizing advertising is only one option, but they also suggest Ottawa is genuinely considering moving in that direction.

“In today’s more educated and informed society, people want greater participation in decisions concerning their own health,” says one background document. “Canada’s health protection legislation and regulations need to be thoroughly reviewed … particularly in the areas of product categorization and advertising.”

The government documents outline three options for Schedule A drug advertising: keep a list of diseases for which advertising is not allowed, but have a clear set of criteria for determining which diseases should be listed; retain the list but allow some risk reduction claims; or legalize advertising for all drugs.

Mr. O’Farrell said broadcasters are proposing a modest set of guidelines for advertising, including a ban for the first few months after a drug is approved to ensure doctors are well-briefed on it before patients see advertising, and mandatory provision of third-party 1-800 or Web site options in the ads for further information.

He rejected the claim advertising would escalate health-care costs by driving prescription demand.

“At the end of the day the television doesn’t prescribe pharmaceuticals.

The physician does,” he said. “Fundamentally, the physician is responsible for prescribing or not prescribing.”

Health Canada’s deadline for consultations is late autumn.