Drug Ads On TV May Infuence Americans To Overmedicate
Featured ArticleMain Category: Pharma Industry / Biotech Industry
Also Included In: Primary Care / General Practice
Article Date: 31 Jan 2007 - 0:00 PDT
| Patient / Public: | ![]() |
4.45 (11 votes) |
| Healthcare Prof: | ![]() |
5 (2 votes) |
| Article Opinions: | 2 posts |
A UCLA study suggests that direct to consumer television advertisements of prescription drugs may be influencing Americans to believe they are sicker than they really are and this could lead to taking more medication than they actually need.
The study is published in the current edition of the Annals of Family Medicine.
It was funded by the National Cancer Institute's Centers of Excellence in Cancer Communication Research and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, and was led by Assistant Professor of General Internal Medicine and Health Services Research at the David Geffen School of Medicine at the University of California, Los Angeles, Dr Dominick Frosch.
The scientists assessed the educational value of 38 direct to consumer tv ads for prescription drugs and analyzed how they tried to influence viewers. The drugs were for treating illnesses ranging insomnia and depression to high cholesterol and high blood pressure.
Their findings suggest that the ads had virtually no educational value, failed to describe who is most at risk for which illnesses, what their symptoms might be, and whether non-medicinal alternatives such as changes to lifestyle like exercise and diet might also be viable options.
Americans watch up to 16 hours of tv ads about prescription drugs per week. The scientists watched the ads shown during the evening news and prime time periods. They used a coding system that takes into account a number of attributes of each ad. The attributes included the factual claims made about the illness the drug is aimed at, the method used to attract the consumer, and also what is revealed about the behaviour and lifestyle of the people in the ad.
Although they found that over 80 per cent of the advertisements did make some factual claims and put forward rational arguments for use of the drugs, only 25 to 26 per cent of them described symptoms and causes of illnesses, the associated risk factors and how common or rare they are.
The scientists also found that many of the ads portrayed the drugs in terms of people losing (58 per cent) control over their lives and then regaining it (85 per cent) once they took the medication. 78 per cent of the ads also portrayed the medication as engendering social approval, while 58 per cent of them implied that the drug was a medical breakthrough.
The findings also show that nearly all ads (95 per cent) used emotional appeal to influence viewers and none of them showed lifestyle and behaviour change as viable alternatives, except for 19 per cent of them that showed this as an adjunct to taking the drug. 18 per cent of the ads suggested that changes to lifestyle would not be enough to deal with the illness.
The conclusion of the study states that despite the claims that tv ads play an educational role, they contain limited information about causes and symptoms of their target illnesses, their prevalence and risk factors. They also show people that have "lost control over their social, emotional or physical lives without the medication; and they minimize the value of health promotion through lifestyle changes. The ads have limited educational value and may oversell the benefits of drugs in ways that might conflict with promoting population health."
New Zealand and the US are the only developed countries that allow prescription drugs to be advertised direct to the consumer on tv. New Zealand is considering stopping it.
Dr Frosch said that "We're seeing a dramatization of health problems that many people used to manage without prescription drugs," and that the "ads send the message that you need drugs to manage these problems and that without medication your life will be less enjoyable, more painful and maybe even out of control." He said that the US should consider banning direct to consumer tv advertising of prescription drugs too.
Last year, the major pharmaceutical companies pledged that tv ads would portray serious illnesses seriously and would describe warnings, side effects and risks according to new guidelines. And in 2005, Paul Antony, their industry spokesman, told a Senate hearing that "direct to consumer advertising can be a powerful tool in educating millions of people and improving health."
"Creating Demand for Prescription Drugs: A Content Analysis of Television Direct-to-Consumer Advertising."
Dominick L. Frosch, PhD, Patrick M. Krueger, PhD, Robert C. Hornik, PhD, Peter F. Cronholm, MD, MSCE, and Frances K. Barg, PhD.
Annals of Family Medicine 5:6-13 (2007)
doi: 10.1370/afm.611
Click here for Abstract (no subscription required).
Written by: Catharine Paddock
Writer: Medical News Today
Copyright: Medical News Today
Not to be reproduced without permission of Medical News Today
MLA
12 Feb. 2012. <http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/61985.php>
APA
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/61985.php.
Please note: If no author information is provided, the source is cited instead.
|
Rate this article: (Hover over the stars then click to rate) |
Patient / Public: |
or |
Health Professional: |
Visitor Opinions In Chronological Order (2)
Prohibit TV Drug Ads.
posted by Bill Cordeiro on 28 Jul 2009 at 11:57 amI have been protesting the proliferation of Drug ads on TV ever since I heard a radio show that demeaned the practice.
The one statistic that I hold on to is that there are only 2 countries in the entire world that condone drug ads on Radio and TV; New Zealand and the United States, and that New Zealand is actively pursuing the dropping of the practice.
This would leave the U.S. alone in the entire world as purveyors of drugs and medications on TV. The country as a whole does not benefit from these ads as pointed out by recent studies. Advertising of drugs and medications on TV does not serve the public interest. Any benefit of drug information is readily available by current medical practice. Let's do away with TV ads for drugs. The rest of the world in this instance has got it right!
To Advertise Medication To Lay People Or Not?
posted by Donald Crowman on 28 Jul 2009 at 8:34 pmI am from England. In the UK prescription medications can only be advertised in trade journals - in other words, just to doctors, nurses, etc. When I went to the USA on business I was a bit shocked at the number of prescription medication ads on TV.
I talked to an American about this. He asked me a question which left me silent - I still cannot answer that question today - ten years later. His question was:
"Why should only doctors be told about what there is on the market. Why should patients not be told?"
Subsequently, I have found that lay Americans know much more about available prescription drugs compared to lay English people. In England most people just hope their doctors are keeping up to date.
Add Your Opinion
Please note that we publish your name, but we do not publish your email address. It is only used to let you know when your message is published. We do not use it for any other purpose. Please see our privacy policy for more information.
If you write about specific medications or operations, please do not name health care professionals by name.
All opinions are moderated before being included (to stop spam)
Contact Our News Editors
For any corrections of factual information, or to contact the editors please use our feedback form.
![]()
Please send any medical news or health news press releases to:
Note: Any medical information published on this website is not intended as a substitute for informed medical advice and you should not take any action before consulting with a health care professional. For more information, please read our terms and conditions.




