Healthy Skepticism Library item: 20177
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
Mold F
Emotive drug ads put on report
NZ Herald 2000 Oct 9
Full text:
The Government has begun a review of emotive advertisements for treating conditions such as sexual impotence, obesity and hair loss.
A spokesman for Health Minister Annette King yesterday confirmed the Health Ministry would review direct-to-consumer advertising of medicines.
No decision has been made on which products will be reviewed but they are expected to range from seaweed extracts to cold sore remedies, the sex drug Viagra and various antibiotics.
The review follows concerns that drug company advertising preys on vulnerable people, who end up pressuring their doctor to prescribe medication which may be inappropriate or unnecessary.
The review, which begins with the release of a discussion document next month, will look at policy and whether legislative changes are needed to ensure the advertising is in the best interests of consumers, and is safe and cost-effective.
Annette King has in the past indicated a possible ban on direct-to-consumer advertising of medicine in New Zealand, which is one of just two countries to allow the practice.
Medical Association chairwoman Dr Pippa MacKay said the organisation supported the review.
There was considerable anxiety about the pressure drug advertising put on the doctor-patient relationship, she said.
The United States had seen a huge rise in pharmaceutical spending as the result of direct-to-consumer advertising and doctors would be concerned if the same happened here.
Pharmac general manager Wayne McNee said he was pleased the review had been announced.
The Government drug agency has consistently expressed concern that direct-to-consumer advertising causes patient confusion, leads to pressure on doctors to prescribe unnecessary drug and affects Government spending on pharmaceuticals.
US figures demonstrate the effect direct-to-consumer advertising can have on drug company profits.
In 1996, the allergy drug Claratyne made $US600 million in sales. The next year the company spent $55 million on direct-to-consumer advertising of Claratyne and profits rocketed to $900 million.
The Researched Medicines Industry, which represents drug companies, has said it wants to retain the right to self-regulate the content and presentation of the advertising.
This year the organisation made public research which it said showed mass media advertising of medications benefited the public.
The research argued that drug companies covered the cost of disseminating knowledge on certain conditions, which encouraged patients to comply with treatment and improved communication with their doctor.
The proposed New Zealand review follows a similar investigation in Australia, which recommended that direct-to-consumer advertising continue to be prohibited. It found advertising controls offered a net public benefit over the alternative of deregulation.
The review cited concerns about the effect of “truthful yet misleading” advertising such as the fat-blocking pill Xenical, which claimed to be twice as effective as diet alone.
“This is misleading because, in fact, diet alone, without exercise, is broadly ineffectual. Twice zero is still zero”, said the report.
Meanwhile, the Advertising Standards Complaints Board has upheld a complaint about the use of a topless woman in a Xenical advertisement being run on the back of buses.
The advertisement uses the image of a young, slim woman naked to the waist, with hair covering her breasts.
The board found the depiction of the naked woman was unnecessary and inappropriate.
“In terms of the product use… the image was gratuitous. In other words, the advertiser used the nakedness of a slim young woman to sell a therapeutic product targeting serious obese people.” It also said the mandatory fine print would be incomprehensible to some people.
