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: 581

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: Journal Article

Wolfe S.
Drug advertisements and prescribing
Lancet 1997; 348:1452-1453

Keywords:
*letter to the editor United States FDA Food and Drug Administration quality of prescribing quality of information journal advertisements attitude toward promotion ATTITUDES REGARDING PROMOTION: HEALTH PROFESSIONALS EVALUATION OF PROMOTION: GENERAL QUALITY OF INFORMATION INFLUENCE OF PROMOTION: PRESCRIBING, DRUG USE REGULATION, CODES, GUIDELINES: DIRECT GOVERNMENT REGULATION


Notes:

Angel resorts to false and misleading statements. The criticisms of the Wilkes study (Michael S. Wilkes et al, Annals of Internal Medicine 1992;116:912-919) is valid and is backed up by other work. The Food and Drug Administration rarely reviews drug ads in advance, with the exception of when a drug is launched. The reply from Angel also omits any mention of the focal point of the commentary which is that advertising does promote inappropriate prescribing.

 

  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