Sign Up Now
Get instant access to over 1 million+ study documents
OR
Already registered? click here to login
By creating your account, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and student honor code.
Limiting DTC drug ads
The moratorium on direct-to-consumer (DTC) prescription drug ads protected patients because it enabled health care practitioners and other professionals to make educated, informed decisions about potentially harmful substances rather than the consumer relying on materials designed exclusively at sales, promotion, and marketing.
DTC drug ads should be again limited by the FDA because the advertisements are potentially misleading, causing consumers to request drugs that they have seen on television or in print ads. These ads can offer what are essentially "miracle" cures, while downplaying potential harmful side effects or by failing to mention other alternatives. "Most direct-to-consumer advertising does not warn patients of drug-drug interactions," ("Direct to Consumer Advertising"). Moreover, many patients might stop taking the medication they are currently on because they see an ad for something else.
The FDA should be dedicated to promoting public health and safety. If prescription drug advertisements interfere at all with this primary objective then the DTC approach to the pharmaceutical industry must be more carefully examined and reconsidered.
DTC prescription drug ads interfere with spending that could be channeled into research and development of new products; an exorbitant amount of money is spent on drug advertisements.
The drugs that are promoted in DTC ads become best-sellers (Collins et al.). Therefore, the DTC ads create an unfair and unbalanced marketplace.
While the FDA should permit the dissemination of information by pharmaceutical companies to consumers, that information must be presented in fair and balanced ways. Patients do have the right to make informed, independent decisions related to their choice of health care plan, but these choices must not be made based on marketing and money-making but rather, on optimal health.
Works Cited
Collins, Susan, et. al. "Prescription Drugs: FDA Oversight of Direct-to-Consumer Advertising Has Limitations." United States General Accounting Office. Oct 2002. .
'Direct to Consumer Advertising for Prescription Drugs." American College of Physicians. 9 Oct 1998. .
'Prescription Drugs and Mass Media Advertising." National Institute for Health Care Management Research and Educational Foundation. Nov. 2001. .
Direct to Consumer Advertising HISTORY OF DRUG ADVERTISING THE DTC ADVERTISING PHENOMENON CREATING DEMAND DECEPTIVE ADVERTISING - A WOLF IN SHEEP'S CLOTHING CAUSE OF DEATH PROFIT UTILIZATION, PRICING, AND DEMOGRAPHICS LEGISLATION, POLITICS AND PATENTS LEGISLATIVE INITIATIVES REGARDING DTC RECALLED and/or DEADLY DRUGS In order to provide the most efficient method of evaluation, the study will utilize existing stores of qualitative and quantitative data from reliable sources, such as U.S. Government statistical references, University studies, and the studies and publications of non-profit
Health Science in Regards to Drugs and Alcohol Legalization of drugs When Colorado and Washington legalized the use of marijuana for recreational purposes, issues related to legalization of all drugs became subject of public debate. Those who voted for legalization of Marijuana in these two states argued that legalization of these drugs would generate revenue, deter black market activities, and check against lose of tax resources used by law enforcement agencies (Will,
S. Food and Drug Administration, because they were in wide use before the 1938 Act (grandfathered in, as it were). (Dunn 1938) The problem was that Act contained a definition for a "new drug" (one in need of prior approval to market), as any drug "the composition of which is such that such drug is not generally recognized, among experts qualified by scientific training and experience to evaluate the safety and
Pharmaceutical Law Perhaps one of the greatest ethical challenges of pharmaceutical marketing will be a result of overreach of the Justice Department with respect to its interpretation of the First Amendment. Indeed, in his dissenting opinion in Sorrell v. IMS Health, Inc., Justice Breyer argued, "If the Court means to create constitutional barriers to regulatory rules that might affect the content of a commercial message, it has embarked upon an unprecedented
Pharm Advertising Reduction of Malpractice One of the key manners in which direct-to-physician advertising of pharmaceuticals can lead to health promotion is in the reduction of malpractice on the part of physicians when it comes to the administering of pharmaceuticals. It is of course the primarily (and ultimately, solely) the physicians' responsibility to ensure the proper and effective use of pharmaceutical products, just as it is their responsibility to ensure that all
First Amendment Advertising is a critical component of any business. Many forms of advertising are protected by the First Amendment, yet "the Supreme Court for many years took the view that commercial speech -- speech that proposes an economic transaction -- was not protected by the First Amendment" (Linder 2012). However, in Virginia State Board of Pharmacy (1976), the Court ruled against a law prohibiting advertising the prices of prescription drugs.