As long as we’re talking about prescription med commercials and the people in them, I’m going to grind my ax. In particular, it’s the commercials for arthritis meds. As a sufferer, I know the portrayals we see have nothing to do with the realities of the VO information. They are two entirely different and unrelated presentations.
Yes, I know they are actor portrayals and not actual patients. And I understand that the ad copy makes no direct claims linking the actor’s actions and the actual effects of the meds, thus avoiding any problems with truthfulness, But the presentation is misleading. People with arthritis cannot easily build playgrounds. Doesn’t work that way. So, while the average viewer is watching the commercial more than listening to it (except for the long, scary list of potentially lethal side effects), they are being led astray from the realities of the condition and the medications. And they do it without the benefit of celebrity endorsement.
Which further causes me to wonder about what exactly it is that the advertising is trying to achieve. There’s nothing memorable about pharmaceutical advertising. Except for the entirely negative, quasi-death threats, what in these ads puts the product top of mind?
Full disclosure: I use Xeljanz. It’s good medicine. Keeps my hands from turning into claws. But the pharma commercials dodge the harsh non-medical realities of the drugs. Getting them isn’t as easy as asking your doctor. It’s not penicillin. The local pharmacist does not stock them and insurance won’t cover the costs because there are no generics. So the part about payment assistance isn’t merely a kind offer, it’s an absolute necessity. Pfizer pays for mine because they charge $4,800/month for it. Humera tops $5,000. That’s why price points are not part of the advertising.
Yes, I know they are actor portrayals and not actual patients. And I understand that the ad copy makes no direct claims linking the actor’s actions and the actual effects of the meds, thus avoiding any problems with truthfulness, But the presentation is misleading. People with arthritis cannot easily build playgrounds. Doesn’t work that way. So, while the average viewer is watching the commercial more than listening to it (except for the long, scary list of potentially lethal side effects), they are being led astray from the realities of the condition and the medications. And they do it without the benefit of celebrity endorsement.
Which further causes me to wonder about what exactly it is that the advertising is trying to achieve. There’s nothing memorable about pharmaceutical advertising. Except for the entirely negative, quasi-death threats, what in these ads puts the product top of mind?
Full disclosure: I use Xeljanz. It’s good medicine. Keeps my hands from turning into claws. But the pharma commercials dodge the harsh non-medical realities of the drugs. Getting them isn’t as easy as asking your doctor. It’s not penicillin. The local pharmacist does not stock them and insurance won’t cover the costs because there are no generics. So the part about payment assistance isn’t merely a kind offer, it’s an absolute necessity. Pfizer pays for mine because they charge $4,800/month for it. Humera tops $5,000. That’s why price points are not part of the advertising.
