This is probably not the first time I will say it but, Congress is nuts! This morning I was enjoying my lunch break (mmm Trader Joe's bean and corn enchiladas) when I saw a Good Morning America spot (I think it was old as this was at 3:30 am) about the controversy surrounding a recent ad put out by Pfizer. It stars Dr. Jarvik, the "inventor of the artificial heart." Apparently, Congress has started a sub-committee to investigate celebrity endorsement in direct-to-consumer drug ads (think Sally Fields and Boniva as well). Way to waste tax-payer dollars.
I realize that the ad is persuasive and plays on Americans' emotions and feelings about heart disease and doctors. I realize Dr. Jarvik is not a medical doctor. I also realize that he didn't even "invent" the artificial heart per say (just his particular version of it). People are complaining that those pitching these ads are not qualified to give medical advice and drugs should be discussed with and prescribed by doctors. Well, last time I checked, they still are. It's not like people call a 1-800 number and order the drug themselves. With the increasing demands put on doctors, an informed consumer is an important thing. And people have a right to now what Pfizer claims (and can back up with research) that their product does.
They also say that people could often get a lower cost drug that would work just as well.
Isn't that the point of advertising? To use whatever means necessary short of out right lying to persuade us that we need this product? While I am in favor of drug reform and would love to see prices lowered and the markets opened up to more competition, especially from foreign drug companies, we currently live in a free market economy. It is the consumers responsibility and privilege to chose. Anyone can request a generic prescription or request a brand name prescription. Pfizer's ads are fine, Congress should not be permitted to step in. It is a doctor's responsibility to discuss side effects, safe dosages, and alternative medications with their patient before prescribing any medication. If that's not happening, it's not Pfizer's fault. We live in a time of tremendously informed medical consumers. If Pfizer wants to provide information, it is entitled to do it in a way that is appealing and persuasive to the consumer. That's the very essence of capitalism. As long as they are not out-right lying (which I don't believe anyone is saying they are), then Congress has no right to get involved. The American people have an obligation to educate themselves. Congress doesn't need to protect us. Adults need to realize you can't believe everything you see on TV. Stop dumbing us down and wasting our money while doing it.
1 comment:
A. Two posts in two days! A trend?...
B. Agreed that people need to educated themselves about drugs, BUT the drug companies need to be honest partners in that endeavor. A study was released just today that unfavorable drug studies tend not to get published in peer-reviewed journals, which gives a rosier-than-deserved picture of the efficacy and safety of some drugs. Also, public/doctor education is clouded by sales people who over-sell, off-label-sell or out-and-out lie about their products - not to mention buying off doctors with trips, speakerships, etc. The view from the consumer side can be pretty darned ugly. (Luckily, none of that ugliness affects the nursing profession. :-)
Post a Comment