During an interview this year, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. declared, “On my first day in office, I am going to issue an order banning pharmaceutical advertising on television…” He suggested that because it spends so much on TV ads, Big Pharma controls the opinions of people like Anderson Cooper. This is a truly strange twist on the old argument that Pharmaceutical advertising should be banned.
Should it? In an opinion piece for The New York Times, Kurt Stange, professor of family medicine and community health at Case Western Reserve University, claimed, “There is no evidence that consumer ads improve treatment quality or result in earlier provision of needed care.” It’s surprising that Stange would make this assertion, especially given that these findings are based on the review of only nine Direct-to-Consumer (DTC) pharmaceutical campaigns. One might ask: Where’s the beef? Does this really justify a ban on pharmaceutical advertising?
Critics often assume that doctors would welcome a ban on DTC ads, with the assumption that “the doctor knows best.” However, these critics should check the facts. A survey by the FDA revealed that 73% of doctors believe DTC marketing improves their dialogue with patients. While they agree that these ads can sometimes confuse patients, most believe that the ads should be modified and improved—not eliminated altogether.
Here are a few examples of how DTC ads benefit patients:
1. Encouraging Thoughtful Discussions: Many doctors believe that DTC advertising promotes meaningful discussions about treatment options. Thanks to the information provided in ads and on related websites, patients come into their appointments much more informed and prepared than they did in the past. A FDA study among doctors found that 73% believe that drug advertising leads to more thoughtful questions from patients.
2. Prompting Doctor Visits: A study by the FDA found that 27% of patients made their first appointment about a medical condition after seeing information in an ad. This includes conditions like overactive bladder, erectile dysfunction, and depression, where ads help overcome stigma and encourage individuals to seek care.
3. Reducing Underdiagnosis: Advertising can help reduce the underdiagnosis of certain conditions. For example, ads for Procrit, which treats chemotherapy-related fatigue, encouraged patients to discuss their symptoms with doctors, leading to the appropriate treatment. And nearly all of the patients (88%) who inquired about medication based on drug ads had the condition being advertised.
4. Increasing Awareness of Health Issues: DTC ads inform the public about medical conditions that are not widely known. A notable example is the advertising campaign for Shingrix, a shingles vaccine. Prior to the campaign, awareness of the vaccine was low, but with ads, more people were educated about this painful condition, encouraging them to seek preventive care.
5. Informing Patients About Treatment Options: DTC advertising introduces patients to treatment options they might not have otherwise considered. These options may not be introduced by doctors, for a variety of reasons.
6. Encouraging Medication Adherence: Advertising helps remind patients of the importance of staying compliant with their prescribed medications, ensuring they continue with necessary treatments.
The American Medical Association Votes to Ban DTC Ads
In line with RFK Jr.’s position, the American Medical Association (AMA) voted in 2015 to support a ban on DTC ads. The AMA argued that these ads often promote new drugs that may not be any better than existing or generic options. However, the vote was narrowly passed, and Dr. Peter Rheinstein, an AMA delegate present at the meeting, noted that the decision deserved further review. Many doctors agreed with him.
Pharmaceutical companies are understandably concerned about the potential consequences of RFK Jr.’s proposed actions. A ban on DTC advertising would significantly impact the industry, making it much more difficult for them to introduce new brands.
Musing about this latest challenge, Beth Snyder Bulik, founder of the Marketing & Pharma Newsletter wonders, ‘where would it all end? He could choose to ban educational advertising from the American Heart Association because it is sponsored by Pharma.’ Robert Ehrlich, CEO of DTC Perspectives, observes that Kennedy may be told that such a ban is unconstitutional. However the courts might allow a partial ban, removing DTC ads from TV.
Let The Patients Decide
After nearly 30 years of experience with pharmaceutical marketing, it’s clear that these ads can benefit patients. Of course, they are not perfect, and there’s room for improvement. The real question now is whether we should ban or hamper them or make adjustments so that they better serve patients. We conduct research among patients and on the whole they favor this type of communication.