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: 8146

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

Dixon K.
Botox's new ads to take on product's stereotypes
Reuters 2007 Feb 1
http://yahoo.reuters.com/news/articlehybrid.aspx?type=comktNews&storyID=urn:newsml:reuters.com:20070202:MTFH81299_2007-02-02_13-00-11_N01296468&pageNumber=1&imageid=&cap=&sz=13&WTModLoc=HybArt-C1-ArticlePage1


Full text:

CHICAGO, Feb 1 (Reuters) – The maker of the wrinkle-smoothing blockbuster drug Botox — used by Hollywood’s elite and news anchors everywhere — is taking jokes about its most famous product seriously.

Despite booming sales, drugmaker Allergan Inc. (AGN.N: Quote, Profile , Research) said this week it will address the common stereotype that injections of Botox freeze the face, preventing users from making expressions. The company is set to launch a new print and television advertising campaign later this year dubbed “Freedom of Expression.”

The product has been the butt of jokes around water coolers and elsewhere, where gossipers recount images of patients who can only move one part of their face following the treatment.

Botox, which is made from the same bacteria that causes the foodborne illness botulism, works by blocking the transmission of nerve impulses to facial muscles to reduce frowning and smooth out wrinkles.

Allergan spokeswoman Caroline Van Hove, who declined to provide further details about the content of the new ads, said the aim of the campaign will be to dispel what she called “myths” about the treatments.

“We want to clearly communicate that while Botox can help women enhance facial appearance, it does not freeze the face and it will enable them to have full facial expressions,” she said.

But some media strategists said the company should think twice before going forward with a campaign that plays directly off the criticism, especially in light of growing concern that consumer advertising of medical products sometimes misleads the public.

“I don’t think it gives you freedom of expression, first of all, so I don’t think it’s believable,” said Alan Siegel, an advertising strategist for the firm Siegel and Gale, and a consultant for medical device makers.

About 3.3 million people had Botox injections in 2005, up from about 65,000 in 1997, according to the American Society of Aesthetic Plastic Surgery.

At the same time, medical device makers such as Allergan have been boosting their presence in television and print ads, following in the successful footsteps of pharmaceutical companies. Consumer advertising of prescription drugs, which was allowed by regulators in the mid-1990s, has been a boon for sales in the drug industry.

Allergan said it plans to submit its advertisements to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for review. But that process is voluntary and the FDA only reviews a small portion of ads that companies submit due to lack of staffing and funds.

Meanwhile, a groundswell of concern has been rising about consumer advertising since the withdrawal of the Merck & Co. (MRK.N: Quote, Profile , Research) painkiller Vioxx, after the drug was linked to increased risk of heart attack and stroke. Some consumer groups, lawmakers and other FDA critics urge limits or an all-out ban on consumer ads.

Some media experts said advertisers should rethink any attempt at a play on words, and stick to scientific facts.

“Freedom of expression does not sound like a good concept. I would start with the myth about Botox, and be scientific and deadly serious,” said Jack Trout, an advertising strategist who has worked for medical companies.

In its defense, Allergan notes that it has had success with innovative product advertising in recent years. It said it was first to promote a medical procedure on television when it ran ads recently for another controversial product – the LapBand device used during obesity surgery.

The company also sells silicone breast implants, which were re-approved for the U.S. market late last year after a 14-year ban because of safety concerns. It plans a print campaign in womens’ magazine for the implants in 2007.

Chief Executive David Pyott told Wall Street analysts this week that campaign will be “modest.”

 

  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