corner
Healthy Skepticism
Join us to help reduce harm from misleading health information.
Increase font size   Decrease font size   Print-friendly view   Print
Register Log in

Healthy Skepticism Library item: 20119

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: Magazine

Fountain B
Advertise and be damned
New Zealand Doctor 2000 Dec 202


Full text:

This month I attended a forum on the advertising of therapeutic products, held in Wellington and organised by advertisers. It was timely for me as my thoughts on the subject of direct-to-consumer (DTC) advertising have been somewhat nebulous.

Yes, as a taxpayer I wanted the Government to spend wisely on medicines and I didn’t want the pharmaceutical companies cynically manipulating demand or creating false hopes among vulnerable consumers. On the other hand, I want access to improved drugs.

The forum suffered from a lack of a strong patient voice, though David Russell did represent the consumer in general.

Like others present I was disappointed at Pharmac’s early departure – merely an hour into the forum – this, despite health minister Annette King hailing the event as a great opportunity for all sides to debate the issues.

Four hours on my thoughts were consolidated. Forget eloquent arguments on the benefits and hazards of DTC advertising. For me it comes down to a question of free speech. Pharmaceuticals are legal, highly regulated products. To ban their advertising to consumers places them alongside tobacco and, to some extent, pornography.

I can appreciate Pharmac’s frustration at the demands generated by DTC advertising and the added pressures doctors can experience, but living in a democracy isn’t always easy.

The mistakes made by Pharmac in its widely disseminated submission to the ministry’s discussion document are inexcusable given its powerful position. And, if I seem partisan, let me say the RMI’s suggestion that DTC advertising, “Improves the overall efficiently of public healthcare spending” is rich, to say the least.

In Pharmac’s absence there appears general support for DTC advertising with further debate likely to revolve around the strictness of necessary controls.

 

  Healthy Skepticism on RSS   Healthy Skepticism on Facebook   Healthy Skepticism on Twitter

Please
Click to Register

(read more)

then
Click to Log in
for free access to more features of this website.

Forgot your username or password?

You are invited to
apply for membership
of Healthy Skepticism,
if you support our aims.

Pay a subscription

Support our work with a donation

Buy Healthy Skepticism T Shirts


If there is something you don't like, please tell us. If you like our work, please tell others.

Email a Friend








Cases of wilful misrepresentation are a rarity in medical advertising. For every advertisement in which nonexistent doctors are called on to testify or deliberately irrelevant references are bunched up in [fine print], you will find a hundred or more whose greatest offenses are unquestioning enthusiasm and the skill to communicate it.

The best defence the physician can muster against this kind of advertising is a healthy skepticism and a willingness, not always apparent in the past, to do his homework. He must cultivate a flair for spotting the logical loophole, the invalid clinical trial, the unreliable or meaningless testimonial, the unneeded improvement and the unlikely claim. Above all, he must develop greater resistance to the lure of the fashionable and the new.
- Pierre R. Garai (advertising executive) 1963