Over the last several years, pharmaceutical companies have launched a campaign style called Direct to Consumer Drug Advertising or known as DTCA. This campaign has led to a large increase of clinical examinations has led to a large increase in clinical examination and this makes the pharmaceutical companies happy and helps padding their pockets. Using this type of advertising, these drug companies allow details of a particular drug to spread to a potential patient and then most likely pushed by the doctor upon visit. These types of advertising campaigns are focused on trying to “enrich” the consumer (Relman p28). Even though this type of advertising campaign allows most drugs to be cheaper overall, consumers should be concerned about the ethical and psychological effect it might have because of the type of massive advertising campaign it has become. This particular study will go on to explain the unethical impact a campaign like this has on side effects and addictions (Findlay p39).
According to an Apr. 2013 survey, 68% of doctors agree that prescription drugs are marketed before safety profiles can be known (Meyer). Theses ads use manipulation and distract the viewer from the potential harms of the medication. For example, the ads for Humira, a drug to help cure psoriasis, uses propaganda to sell its product. Although they do mention all the possible side effects, including death, they do so while a woman in the background looks happy and so confident that it almost makes people ignore what they are saying. Prescription ads promote drugs before long-term safety information is known. Although prescription ads inform people about possible treatment, it ultimately can be harmful to the consumer’s health because the effects
Almost a third of adults say that they have spoken to their doctor about a drug they saw advertised on television and forty-four percent of those patients were prescribed the medication.(6) Pharmaceutical companies market their drugs in the most favorable light, oftentimes mitigating rare but significant side effects.(7) Most provide typical product information, along with vague descriptions of benefits; however, significantly fewer provide the ―prevalence of, risk factors for, or causes of the condition.(7)
There are many direct to consumer advertising for prescription drugs. On television, magazines, radio etc, you see the most recent advertisements for prescription drugs. After some people see the advertisements they soon rush over to their doctor and their illness and life would be perfectly pain and stress free. Making the public conscious of options for treatment is not a bad thing. But these false advertisements are misleading consumers onto unnecessary treatment.
We live in a world where being medicated has become a societal norm. Modern health care practices have set the stage for the proliferation of direct-to-consumer advertising (DTCA) of prescription drugs by pharmaceutical manufacturers. Some of these practices include the emergence of managed care organizations (MCOs), the legalization of DTCA of prescription drugs, the emergence of the Internet as an alternative promotional channel, the increased desire by patients to become more involved in their own health care decisions, the disillusionment with traditional medicine, and the rise of ‘alternative’ medicine, to name a few. There is an ongoing debate as to the ultimate harm or benefit of this relatively recent practice of pharmaceutical manufacturers to direct their promotional efforts away from the physician and towards the consumer.
I find the medication commercials to be interesting. All of them claim to work miracles on whatever may be ailing you, whether it is eczema or arthritis. Yet all of the come with a whole host of side effects that sound like they would be worse than dealing with the actual ailment. For example the medication afrezza which is an inhaled insulin for diabetes states at the end of their commercial not to take afrezza if you are allergic to afrezza, after this statement they go into detail on side effects that may occur is you are allergic to afrezza. In my head I am always hoping that there is a way to test the patient to make sure they are indeed not allergic before they administer the said drug, and that they do not have to take a chance on the
Television, radio, and billboard advertisements for pharmaceuticals are commonplace in today’s society. Nonetheless, the debate concerning Big Pharma’s direct-to-consumer marketing ploy takes place in the realm of medicine, business, and certainly public health. Each party utilizes tactics that rests on various points on the spectrum of coercion, thus having different expectations of the role governmental authorities. One shared commonality, however, is the focus on the consumer’s rights and liberties. Through ethical and human rights perspectives, it is possible to dissect three philosophies used to leverage current day practices of pharmaceutical companies, American consumers, and public health professionals. Based on ethical and human rights lenses, the field of public health urges the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to enforce strict regulations in the way medication is marketed, if not severely limit the number of ads being produced.
This article discusses the difficulties that consumers have had with following prescription medication instructions and highlights the need to ensure that patients understand medication instructions more clearly. It then makes several recommendations as to how to make this happen with regard to prescription writing, prescription labeling, and communication. This is relevant to my project because it suggests ways to improve patient health literacy specifically when it comes to prescription medications. Although this is only one facet of the healthcare field, the dangers associated with misunderstandings of drug use are monumental. Improving health literacy in this way will be one contributing factor to an overall better understanding of healthcare.
Although the pharmaceutical industry says that prescription medicines are as safe as they can possibly be, prescribed drugs have a high increase of risking a patient’s health. According to the law, drug makers seek Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval for specific uses of their products and conduct trials to test their drugs safety and effectiveness in patients with specific conditions. The FDA demands that drug companies conduct rigorous clinical trials to prove a drugs safety and effectiveness in treating a particular disease. However, once the FDA approves a drug for one use, doctors can prescribe it for whatever they want. The FDA is considering loosening the monitoring of off-label prescriptions, but if anything, regulations should be tightened. Despite the practices of some medical personnel, the risk of serious medical complications demands that the FDA regulate and restrict off-label use of prescription drugs.
Major components of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) statutory authority have evolved in response to drug-related public health crises and in response to a changing environment. The social and health care environment has changed and continues to evolve—health care providers and patients expect timely access to effective drugs, the user-fee program established in 1992 has increased the pace of drug review and approval, the practice of medicine and the use of drugs have changed, and the information available to the public from advertising and the Internet and from commercial and government or nonprofit sources has transformed consumer knowledge and the patient’s role in health care (see Chapter 1 for more information). In view of those