Healthy Skepticism Library item: 1730

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

McGregor .
Ban on drug ads to stay: McLellan
The Ottawa Citizen 2002 Mar 23

Abstract:

Minister refuses to loosen regulations despite lobbying by manufacturers, media

Full text:

Health Minister Anne McLellan says she sees no reason to allow U.S.-style advertising for prescription drugs in Canada, despite heavy lobbying by brand-name drug companies and media outlets to loosen the rules on drug ads.

“We have no intention of changing the present policy,” she told reporters outside the House of Commons. She allowed that Canadians are already exposed to drug advertising on American television, but said that wasn’t a compelling enough reason to allow the same sort of advertising in Canada.

“Indeed, there are drugs ads in the U.S, but I see no reason to change the regulations in this country,” she said.

Ms. McLellan did not elaborate on her reason, but in an interview published this week she suggested drug advertising is of questionable value to patients. Ms. McLellan said the experience of direct-to-consumer advertising in the U.S. has shown that patients who see drug ads pressure their doctors to prescribe the drug.

“The doctor tells them there is no increased or enhanced effectiveness by providing the drug advertised, but the patient is very persistent once they see the advertisement,” she told the Hill Times political weekly.

“One has to question whether you are getting better medical outcomes.”

Direct-to-consumer drug advertising has been a contentious issue both in the U.S. and Canada, with pharmaceutical companies pushing for more freedom to advertise and critics warning that ads needlessly push up the cost of drugs.

The brand-name drug companies argue that Canadians deserve to the get the same information about drugs as consumers in the U.S., where rules on television and print ads are far less restrictive.

In Canada, drug companies are allowed to advertise a product’s name, or encourage people to seek information about a particular illness, but they can’t do both at the same time. In the U.S., where advertising rules were relaxed in 1997, pharmaceutical companies bombard consumers with ads for top-selling drugs such as Celeberex, an arthritis medication, Nexium, a heartburn drug, and Viagra, used to treat impotence in men.

According to a study published last month in the New England Journal of Medicine, spending on direct-to-consumer ads tripled between 1996 and 2000, when it reached $2.5 billion U.S. annually. The potential revenues for Canadian media are huge. The Canadian Association of Broadcasters this week told the Commons Heritage committee that drug commercials could bring in as much as $240 million annually to Canadian radio and television outlets.

But Ms. McLellan’s remarks were welcomed by the Canadian Medical Association, which warns that U.S.-style ads don’t give patients all the information they need about side-effects.

“When you look down south, you have the impression they look at drugs as a consumer good, rather than something that has a health benefit,” said Dr. Henry Haddad, president of the CMA. “They banalize the fact of taking drugs.”

Although many Canadians are exposed to drug ads on U.S. television and in magazines, Dr. Haddad says that’s no reason to change our rules. “Why should we make it worse?” he asked.

Dr. Haddad says drug companies in Canada are already straining the limits of legality in ads currently on television, such as the widely broadcast commercial for Viagra. In the spot, a middle-aged man is seen skipping happily to work to the tune of the song Good Morning. Although there is no mention of the drug’s erection-enhancing properties, the subtext of the ad is implicit — that the man is having sex again.

Dr. Haddad was also critical of a billboard for Zyban, used to help people quit smoking, which shows an attractive young couple lounging blissfully in bed. “My association would like to see those type of ads disappear,” he said. “I think they’re walking a very fine line and the minister should look at it.”

Murray Elston, president of the brand-name pharmaceutical lobby group Rx & D said he didn’t want to comment on Ms. McLellan’s remarks until Health Canada officials release their study of direct-to-consumer advertising.

“We’ll wait and see what the official result of it is,” he said. “Obviously, its important to us to provide more information to patients.”