Support NeoGAF

[Dilbert]

OK, time for the first in a series of suggestions on how to improve America. First up (since I saw them all weekend long watching football) are prescription drug ads. There is NO REASON for drug companies to be marketing prescription drugs to private citizens -- period. Is the guy sitting at home with cholesterol dripping out of his ears or a floppy penis supposed to see these ads, think to himself, "Self, I think I'll go into my doctor tomorrow and hold a gun to his ribs until he writes me a prescription for Unclogbonerstatin -- that'll fix me good!"

And how can DOCTORS be on board with these ads? I mean, I know they are marketed to separately -- there are always product reps and samples lying around the office whenever I go to the doctor. But at least doctors are trained professionals who can evaluate the merits or risks of the drugs, whereas most ordinary people can't. Also, as a doctor, wouldn't you be pissed if a patient came in and tried to medicate him/herself by trying to talk you into a prescription? Isn't that a violation of medical ethics?

Comments?

 

[explodet]

"symptoms may include headache, stiff neck, aches and pains in muscles and joints, low-grade fever and chills, fatigue, poor appetite, sore throat, swollen glands, itchy rashes, projectile vomiting, the condition known as hot dog fingers, full-body hair loss, gigantic eyeballs, children born with the head of a golden retriever..."

That's one thing I never understood about drug ads - a lot of times the cure seems worse than the disease.

 

[mrmyth]

I work in a hospital. Sorry to burst your bubble, but professionally trained doctors prescribe what's available. They don't give a shit, and will only move to other drugs if the first choice doesn't work. And what's usually available and the first choice is from the most tenacious rep. Like spam, prescription drug advertising exists because it works and its profitable. Can't get more American than that.

 

[videogamer]

I work in a hospital. Sorry to burst your bubble, but professionally trained doctors prescribe what's available. They don't give a shit, and will only move to other drugs if the first choice doesn't work. And what's usually available and the first choice is from the most tenacious rep. Like spam, prescription drug advertising exists because it works and its profitable. Can't get more American than that.

Doctors do have to prescribe medicine that the patients can afford. This can involve looking up what the patient's health care plan will pay for. Furthermore, doctors (at least the ones I know) are not afraid to prescribe generics or less expensive drugs. But they aren't afraid to take advantage of free pens or meals from company reps either. However, I believe that -Jinx- was talking about marketing to the consumer, not the marketing to the physicians, which you addressed instead.


BTW, this thread is sooooo right for Loki

 

[Eminem]

Every commercial that comes on TV is a prescription drug ad.
I can’t watch TV for four minutes without thinking I have five serious diseases.
Like: “Do you ever wake up tired in the morning?”
Oh my god I have this, write this down. Whatever it is, I have it.
Half the time I don’t even know what the commercial is…
people running in fields or flying kites or swimming in the ocean.
I’m like that is the greatest disease ever. How do you get that?
That disease comes with a hot chick and a puppy.

 

[Triumph]

I agree wholeheartedly, jinx. But mrmyth is also correct, the companies do this because it works. I think the problem has more to do with the way Americans act as consumers than it has to do with corporations doing what they're gonna do anyway(as much as they can get away with).

 

[Matlock]

That's one thing I never understood about drug ads - a lot of times the cure seems worse than the disease.

The side effects are taken from research: anyone who has any symptom after taking the drug has to be looked at and it has to be classified as a real symptom of the drug. Messed up, really, as the structure for qualifying it is rather loose.

 

[Loki]

And how can DOCTORS be on board with these ads? I mean, I know they are marketed to separately -- there are always product reps and samples lying around the office whenever I go to the doctor. But at least doctors are trained professionals who can evaluate the merits or risks of the drugs, whereas most ordinary people can't. Also, as a doctor, wouldn't you be pissed if a patient came in and tried to medicate him/herself by trying to talk you into a prescription? Isn't that a violation of medical ethics?

Comments?

By and large, they're not. If you peruse the physician weblogs, you'll see that most are clearly against direct-to-consumer advertising for precisely the reasons you alluded to. It goes even further, though-- for many new drugs, there are NO independent clinical studies done; most studies and trials are directly or indirectly funded by the pharmaceutical companies themselves, in a clear breach of ethics (conflict of interest and all). Truly independent research on new drugs is becoming harder and harder to come by, and many physicians have lamented that fact and spoken out against it. Unfortunately, the AMA and the various specialty organizations (National Ass'n of Cardiologists etc.) have absolutely zero clout in this country (yes, believe it)-- especially as compared to big pharma.


More later. It's worth noting, however, that prior to the early 90's, direct-to-consumer advertising of pharmaceuticals was illegal. Then someone got the bright idea to deregulate it, leading to the ridiculous situation we have today. And you are quite correct that pressure is put on doctors by patients to prescribe these "latest, greatest" meds that they see advertised on TV as opposed to tried and true standbys, even if the new product has scant scientific evidence attesting to its efficacy or is of negligible benefit above and beyond the older meds; this leads to conflict and antagonism ("why won't the doctor prescribe me product A? Doesn't he want the best for me?" etc.). It's definitely an out-of-control situation.



Unfortunately, whenever one speaks of reining in DTC advertising, they are confronted with the same clamorous protestations from "free market advocates" that exponents of corporate reform in other spheres are always contending with in the public discourse. The fact of the matter is that DTC advertising creates artifically induced demand for a product whose benefit may perhaps be negligible, and, further, whose supporting evidence (in the form of trials/studies etc.) may be compromised due to the changing academic/clinical climate that results from the involvement of pharm companies in the academic process. It's a bigger problem than people realize. I'll see if I can fish up some commentary on the matter for later; I'll post more of my own thoughts as well.

 

[brooklyngooner]

]for many new drugs, there are NO independent clinical studies done; most studies and research is directly or indirectly funded by the pharmaceutical companies themselves, in a clear breach of ethics (conflict of interest and all). Truly independent research on new drugs is becoming harder and harder to come by

Sorry I really felt this needed to be repeated.

And Loki, what the hell. That was a very manageable three paragraphs. I found time to read all of it.

 

[radios shipping overview]

The fact of the matter is that DTC advertising creates artifically induced demand for a product whose benefit may perhaps be negligible...

Sounds like quintessential advertising to me. >_<

I always wonder how much lower drug costs would be for patients if the pharmaceutical corporations didn't spend so much on advertising. The companies' main interests are in getting the next slightly-modified drug with a new patent onto the market in time to replace the ones whose patents are expiring. I don't see this kind of behavior as being in the patient's best interest, and really, shouldn't that be the primary concern?

 

[Loki]

Sounds like quintessential advertising to me. >_<

Oh it is, don't get me wrong. The question is whether the same advertising paradigm should apply to an area where lay persons are ill-qualified to make purchasing decisions (or pressure their physicians into prescribing these meds), as opposed to other, comparatively innocuous areas (entertainment, household products etc.), where most people have a good grasp on the relativ merits/drawbacks of various products. The whole question is tied up with the other issues I mentioned regarding the declining number of truly independent studies (clinical and academic) on new drugs due to corporate influence, even at the universities (never mind the FDA, which itself is incredibly compromised). Money buys power in the US, unfortunately.


In other words, if only trained professionals (physicians, biochemists, pharmacists etc.) are able to make proper decisions regarding these drugs, and the information they're being provided with is questionable at best ("failed" trials and adverse effects being swept under the rug in many instances due to the huge profits realizeable), then A) how can they come to a truly educated decision regarding these new drugs, and B) how can we defend a system wherein the physicians who choose to stick with tried-and-true drugs (because many of them do not like this new paradigm of corporate encroachment into academic research and would like to stick with proven drugs that were tested properly) are then pressured by patients into prescribing the latest, "greatest" drug due to DTC advertising.


Something's gotta give imo. More later.


EDIT:

I always wonder how much lower drug costs would be for patients if the pharmaceutical corporations didn't spend so much on advertising. The companies' main interests are in getting the next slightly-modified drug with a new patent onto the market in time to replace the ones whose patents are expiring. I don't see this kind of behavior as being in the patient's best interest, and really, shouldn't that be the primary concern?

Absolutely. Some of the reasons for the high cost of pharmaceuticals are discussed in the threads seen here and here.

And Loki, what the hell. That was a very manageable three paragraphs. I found time to read all of it.

I know...I'm slipping.

 

[Christoff Yurievich]

Half the time I don&#8217;t even know what the commercial is&#8230;
people running in fields or flying kites or swimming in the ocean.
I&#8217;m like that is the greatest disease ever. How do you get that?
That disease comes with a hot chick and a puppy.

:lol :lol