Efforts to Ban Drug Commercials on Radio

[dmargalotti]

This today from Inside Radio: "Efforts to ban direct-to-consumer pharmaceutical advertising have mostly been centered in Congress, but there’s a push in Oklahoma and Connecticut to take state-level approaches. This comes as a new bill has been introduced to limit drug ads on a national level".

I've always questioned why pharmaceutical companies were allowed to market their products to consumers who could not buy them directly? "Ask your doctor if this pill is right for you", while obviously highly effective, has always been a bit backwards to me. Wouldn't it be better if the pharmaceutical companies used that money to educate doctors about available treatment options so that they could in turn make a recommendation to the patient? The amount of drug commercials aired across the country is pretty astounding. Obviously if these measures advance, it will have a negative impact on revenue for radio companies that are already dealing with a steady decline in income. Your thoughts?

States Begin Efforts To Ban Drug Advertising.

 

[TheBigA]

Wouldn't it be better if the pharmaceutical companies used that money to educate doctors about available treatment options so that they could in turn make a recommendation to the patient?

They do that as well. My health care provider has lots of placards and samples of prescription drugs available as well. But I wouldn't even know I have a medical problem if I didn't see the ad on TV first. Doctors aren't salesmen. Mine is hesitant to even recommend various basic vaccinations such as flu because of all the vaccine controversy. Ultimately it's up to the doctor to prescribe the drug. But they're not going to seek out the disease unless you tell them you have it, and you may not know what you have unless an ad makes you aware.

I was surprised that some basic cold remedies that are available OTC still require the cashier to verify your age in some states.

 

[kevtronics]

Wouldn't it be better if the pharmaceutical companies used that money to educate doctors about available treatment options so that they could in turn make a recommendation to the patient?

Oh, they most certainly do that too, to the extent that doctors are programmed to think that drugs are the solution to every problem, and they give out opioid painkillers like candy.

I recently listened to an NPR program about a woman who took drugs for 15 years to treat a bipolar disorder which she didn't have, because doctors pushed them on patients who were simply depressed, rather than who actually had symptoms of manic/depressive (bipolar) disorder.

https://www.npr.org/2025/02/28/1234443279/misdiagnosis-bipolar-disorder

 

[ac175]

Bill Maher had a funny segment about this a few months ago. "Tell your doctor you know more than them and you need this drug"

 

[davideduardo]

Oh, they most certainly do that too, to the extent that doctors are programmed to think that drugs are the solution to every problem, and they give out opioid painkillers like candy.

That is a nasty overstatement. A few doctors gave out huge numbers of excessive opioid prescriptions, and that is mostly curtailed. The result is that people with extreme pain have a hard time getting any relief because the "gummint" has so restricted dosages and so controlled supplies that there are times that a person in pain can not get the needed relief.

I recently listened to an NPR program about a woman who took drugs for 15 years to treat a bipolar disorder which she didn't have, because doctors pushed them on patients who were simply depressed, rather than who actually had symptoms of manic/depressive (bipolar) disorder.

As the saying goes, half of all doctors graduated in the lower half of their class. Since you are so quick to criticize, what is the solution?

The subject of this forum thread is radio or FCC regulated media drug advertising. A lot can be said for letting consumers out there know what is available so they can ask their doctor... or if they don't have one, find a clinic or medical service that can take the necessary steps to consider new drugs or alternative treatments.

In my opinion, those to blame for misuse of prescription drugs are the unethical or unaware doctors and not the drug companies or the users of the drugs. Prohibiting radio and TV advertising of prescription meds simply drives that advertising to unregulated media and does nothing to improve healthcare.

 

[davideduardo]

I was surprised that some basic cold remedies that are available OTC still require the cashier to verify your age in some states.

There is a reason: either they have a high amount of alcohol or they can be use as an ingredient in making recreational drugs. Kids can't buy beer or other liquors either.

I recall that I needed a parent's note to buy rubber cement (to make photo albums back in the later 50's) because inhaling it was intoxicating.

However, all those are products that can be otherwise freely purchased and advertised on regulated media.

 

[Voicetrack of Reason]

That is a nasty overstatement. A few doctors gave out huge numbers of excessive opioid prescriptions, and that is mostly curtailed. The result is that people with extreme pain have a hard time getting any relief because the "gummint" has so restricted dosages and so controlled supplies that there are times that a person in pain can not get the needed relief.

As the saying goes, half of all doctors graduated in the lower half of their class. Since you are so quick to criticize, what is the solution?

The subject of this is radio or FCC regulated media drug advertising. A lot can be said for letting consumers out there know what is available so they can ask their doctor... or if they don't have one, find a clinic or medical service that can take the necessary steps to consider new drugs or alternative treatments.

In my opinion, those to blame for misuse of prescription drugs are the unethical or unaware doctors and not the drug companies or the users of the drugs. Prohibiting radio and TV advertising of prescription meds simply drives that advertising to unregulated media and does nothing to improve healthcare.

As someone suffering from Stage 4 cancer, I absolutely agree with David on paragraph #2. You can't get anything done if you're forever in pain.

On another note, if I never hear that insipid GA/macular degeneration spot, done to the tune of "Low Rider" by War again, I'd be thrilled 😁 Extremely annoying.

 

[Delete My Account]

In my opinion, those to blame for misuse of prescription drugs are the unethical or unaware doctors and not the drug companies or the users of the drugs. Prohibiting radio and TV advertising of prescription meds simply drives that advertising to unregulated media and does nothing to improve healthcare.

There is bipartisan agreement that the Sackler family in particular actively downplayed the addictive nature of their product. That's why they were fined, including by the Republican AG of Texas. There's plenty of "pushers" in big pharma.

As to the radio and TV advertising, I find it amusing simply because half the ad is a disclaimer at this point. "Don't take drug X if you're allergic to drug X."

How would I know? I've never taken it.

 

[davideduardo]

As someone suffering from Stage 4 cancer, I absolutely agree with David on paragraph #2. You can't get anything done if you're forever in pain.

First, my prayers and "good vibes" for your treatment.

I have a complicated lower back issue that is horrendously painful. Between the government over-restricting pain killer availability, drug stores afraid to stock them due to the potential for armed robbery and the blaming of the drug companies for something corrupt doctors alone have caused, there have been several times in the last year that I have not been able to get my prescription filled.

Yet in the media, we see the drug companies blamed. There is an entire network TV show based on the heroine plotting to get back at lawyers who defended drug companies. The media, mostly television and film to be specific, wants to blame nearly everything on "big business" rather than seeking the root causes.

Interestingly, the Mexican government has decided to declare that drug manufacturing and distribution source in Mexico is not that nation's fault; is is the fault of those American addicts that illegal drugs are being trafficked.

On another note, if I never hear that insipid GA/macular degeneration spot, done to the tune of "Low Rider" by War again, I'd be thrilled 😁 Extremely annoying.

I don't think you are alone; I am perpetually annoyed by the use of "oldies" redone by second rate (third?) singers to promote anything from medications to dish washing liquid.

 

[radiofan2023]

I'm more annoyed with vitamin supplement advertising, especially those insipid Balance of Nature spots

 

[Jean Luc]

Is there any evidence that drug commercials to consumers are effective in generating drug sales? The "call to action" is "ask your doctor." Patients don't make purchase decisions. The decisions are made by someone with a prescription pad. And mostly, the drugs advertised to consumers, are not included in patients' drug plans so the money spent on advertising goes down the drain when people find out the retail price.

 

[TheBigA]

Is there any evidence that drug commercials to consumers are effective in generating drug sales? The "call to action" is "ask your doctor."

It's not necessarily about sales, but rather information. But it depends on the drug. You ask your doctor, and if the doctor prescribes it, then it's a sale. But the doctor isn't going to sell you on something you don't ask about. This is step one in a multi-step process. That's where this gets into a first amendment issue. Selling drugs is a form of speech.

 

[Jean Luc]

It's not necessarily about sales, but rather information. But it depends on the drug. You ask your doctor, and if the doctor prescribes it, then it's a sale. But the doctor isn't going to sell you on something you don't ask about. This is step one in a multi-step process. That's where this gets into a first amendment issue. Selling drugs is a form of speech.

Not quite. People have a complaint and they go to their doctor and expect the doctor to know what to do about it. Drug commercials appear to assume that people are putting up with something and haven't gone to their doctor about it or they aren't satisfied with their current treatment for some reason. However, there is considerable evidence that doctors resent having patients come in and tell them they read or saw something and start telling the doctor how to do their job. In such cases, physicians tend to advocate against the drug.

The first amendment is not absolute and advertising is highly regulated, especially pharmaceutical advertising. It's only legal because the drug industry through a ton of money at members of congress. Which is also why the cost of prescription drugs is so much higher in this country than any where else.

 

[Larry]

there any evidence that drug commercials to consumers are effective in generating drug sales? The "call to action" is "ask your doctor."

Without doing an internet search for data I think it’s safe to say if it wasn’t effective you wouldn’t see the huge amount of prescription drug tv advertising that airs today

I think if you asked drs most would say patients often bring these drugs up, describing their symptoms and hoping this advertised drug will address what ails (or they think ails) them.

 

[davideduardo]

The first amendment is not absolute and advertising is highly regulated, especially pharmaceutical advertising. It's only legal because the drug industry through a ton of money at members of congress. Which is also why the cost of prescription drugs is so much higher in this country than any where else.

Not exactly true.

Drug prices are principally determined by the economy of each nation. Richer nations pay more, poor ones do not. That is why so many of my neighbors make a regular two hour drive to Mexico to buy their prescription drugs. There is a whole town outside of Mexicali that has an easy border crossing and where prescriptions for the same drug from the same manufacturer can be had for as little as 10% of U.S. pricing.

 

[TheBigA]

Not quite. People have a complaint and they go to their doctor and expect the doctor to know what to do about it.

Sometimes. Not everyone has a doctor. But as I said, the drug companies are also informing doctors and hospitals. There's a huge medical industrial complex out there.

The first amendment is not absolute and advertising is highly regulated, especially pharmaceutical advertising. It's only legal because the drug industry through a ton of money at members of congress. Which is also why the cost of prescription drugs is so much higher in this country than any where else.

The cost is high because it costs a lot to develop drugs. As you said, it's highly regulated, and those regulations make it more expensive to invent and develop drugs. It takes years to get approval. That's not a function of the advertising.

Meanwhile cigarette advertising has been prohibited got 50 years, and cigarettes haven't gotten cheaper. The cigarette makers find other ways to advertise other than radio & TV. So all this law would do is deprive broadcasting of a major source of revenue.

 

[davideduardo]

Sometimes. Not everyone has a doctor.

Very valid point. The reason so many ER's are overflowing is the number of people with no permanent physician who they have developed a relationship with.

But as I said, the drug companies are also informing doctors and hospitals. There's a huge medical industrial complex out there.

There is also a lot of "selling" going on at hospitals, clinics and urgent care facilities to get them to stock and encourage their physicians to prescribe their products.

Meanwhile cigarette advertising has been prohibited got 50 years, and cigarettes haven't gotten cheaper. The cigarette makers find other ways to advertise other than radio & TV. So all this law would do is deprive broadcasting of a major source of revenue.

And all the advertisers would do is go to unregulated media, such as those prescription med ads that pop up quite regularly when I am looking at news articles or even doing unrelated searches.

 

[ted chittenden]

Mostly, the drugs advertised to consumers, are not included in patients' drug plans so the money spent on advertising goes down the drain when people find out the retail price.

That last sentence is an overgeneralization. While it's true that insurance companies are hesitant about prescribing new drugs or some that are overexpensive, much of the advertising money does, in fact, support drugs that are available through many insurance plans.

 

[Theater of My Mind]

This today from Inside Radio: "Efforts to ban direct-to-consumer pharmaceutical advertising have mostly been centered in Congress, but there’s a push in Oklahoma and Connecticut to take state-level approaches. This comes as a new bill has been introduced to limit drug ads on a national level".

I've always questioned why pharmaceutical companies were allowed to market their products to consumers who could not buy them directly? "Ask your doctor if this pill is right for you", while obviously highly effective, has always been a bit backwards to me.

Is that what this is about? Or are they going after the companies that are advertising things like mail-order pills where the consultation with their "doctor" to write the required prescription is included?

Wouldn't it be better if the pharmaceutical companies used that money to educate doctors about available treatment options so that they could in turn make a recommendation to the patient?

My understanding is that the pharmaceutical companies' relationship with doctors is akin to the music industry's relationship with radio. Lots of valuable perks and payments are offered to doctors who push prescriptions for their most profitable products. There seems to be plenty of money flowing at these companies for both the doctor relationships and advertising.

Relationships between physicians and Pharma: Why physicians should not accept money from the pharmaceutical industry - PMC

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

 

[JJSPC]

Can we also get rid of the television spots where everyone showed is so happy and carefree, while at the bottom of the screen are shown all the side effects that potentially can kill you?