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: 3129

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

Kushner D.
Two-thirds of RPh's & MD's object to makers' promotion of Rx drugs to the public
American Druggist 1982 Oct; 186:(1):14, 16, 21-22


Abstract:

Two representative nationwide surveys conducted by American Druggist and the AMA to measure reactions of pharmacists and physicians to the growing trend of direct-to-consumer prescription drug advertising found that marketers who promote their products, by name, directly to the public were likely to earn the disapproval of most pharmacists (68.7%) and physicians (63.9%). 23.3% of pharmacists and 28.6% of physicians reported mixed feelings. Only 7.6% of pharmacists and 6.6% of physicians reported no objections. Such promotion has been only been attempted by a few manufacturers for a year or so. There seems little doubt that two factors have encouraged it: fierce competition for business on some newer categories of drugs for common diseases, such as non-steroidal anti-inflammatories for rheumatic disorders., and the ‘educate-the-patient’ movement. Pharmacists’ objections centred on two themes. Firstly, DTCA bypasses physicians and pharmacists, puts pressure on them, and usurps their professional prerogatives. Secondly, many consumers think the drugs are available over the counter, and are suspicious or resentful when pharmacists tell them otherwise. Hospital pharmacists were more negative about DTCA than community pharmacists. Most pharmacists believed that DTCA would inflate drug prices. Among physicians, internists and GPs were least likely to object to DTCA. Physicians aged 35 to 64 were more likely than younger or older physicians to object.

Keywords:
*cross-sectional study/United States/

 

  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