Loading...
If you watch any television at all, you know that prescription drug ads are pervasive. I find commercials that promote Humira for Crohn’s disease, Dupixent for atopic dermatitis, Trulicity for type 2 diabetes and Otezla for plaque psoriasis annoying at best and appalling at worst. But what really aggravates me are the commercials for cancer medications such as Imbruvica, Keytruda, Piqray or Versenio. Are ads for cancer drugs really appropriate on television?
This Is Your Brain on Drug…Commercials!
Remember the old anti-drug commercials from the 1980s? Here is a commercial that shows a man in a kitchen.
He says:
“Is there anyone out there who still isn’t clear about what doing drugs does? OK, last time!”
He strides to the stove and picks up an egg.
“This is your brain.”
He points to a hot frying pan.
“This is drugs.”
He cracks open the egg and drops it into the hot frying pan.
He holds up the frying pan with the fried egg sizzling away.
“This is your brain on drugs.”
He ends the demo with a slightly snide comment:
“Any questions?”
We don’t know whether this anti-drug campaign stopped people from abusing drugs. But Planet Money did a very clever segment for NPR (Sept. 8, 2021) titled:
This Is Your Brain On Drug Ads
The segment describes how British folks who watched American television were horrified by all the prescription drug commercials. It also asks the question: what do all these drug ads do to us?
Ads For Cancer Drugs…Really?
One of the things that the Brits were astonished about was the serious nature of the prescription drug commercials. Many countries allow ads for OTC drugs like headache remedies or aids for indigestion. But only New Zealand and the US allow heavy-duty prescription drug commercials on TV.
As one of the commenters put it, England doesn’t allow commercials where you are supposed to go to doctor and tell them what you need. What the heck is going on in America? Those commercials are some real dystopian S*#!
The ads for cancer drugs really take the cake. Cancer is one of the most challenging medical conditions doctors have to treat. It’s not surprising, then, that oncologists undergo many years of rigorous training. And because their field is constantly changing, they have to work hard to stay on top of new developments.
A Medical Education Takes Years!
After four years of medical school, it is not uncommon for a graduate to spend anywhere from three to seven more years in residency and fellowship programs to achieve expertise as a specialist. Oncologists have especially challenging careers That’s because cancer treatment is complicated and constantly evolving. What might have been considered standard of care five years ago for breast cancer could be quite different in 2022. And sadly, many patients die even with the latest treatments.
Imagine you are a lung cancer specialist who has gone through a decade of intense training. Now, a patient walks into your exam room and asks you for a specific medication based on a television commercial. How would you feel?
Ads for Cancer Drugs to Treat CLL:
Do physicians who specialize in blood cancers (hematology oncology specialists or Heme/Onc doctors) really need their patients to tell them what to prescribe for hard-to-treat cancers like CLL (chronic lymphocytic leukemia)? Some drug companies seem to think so. Why else would they spend so much money on television commercials directed at patients?
According to the National Cancer Institute, approximately 21,000 people develop CLL annually. It accounts for 0.7% of all cancer deaths this year. The 5-year survival is over 87 percent.
Ask Your Doctor if Imbruvica (ibrutinib) Is Right for You:
A commercial for Imbruvica has captured my attention. It starts with a middle-aged man out camping with his family.
He says:
“I am living with CLL, and I am living longer thanks to Imbruvica.”
While the family spreads out its picnic blanket, the voice-over continues:
“Imbruvica is a prescription medicine for adults with CLL, or chronic lymphocytic leukemia. It will not work for everyone. Imbruvica is the number-one prescribed oral therapy for CLL, and it’s proven to help people live longer. Imbruvica is not chemotherapy.
“Imbruvica can cause serious side effects, which may lead to death. Bleeding problems are common and may increase with blood-thinners. Serious infections with symptoms like fevers, chills, weakness or confusion and severe decrease in blood counts can happen.”
In the midst of this litany of potentially catastrophic consequences, the family has traveled to a mountainous area and is unpacking its telescope to watch shooting stars.
The voice-over continues:
“Heart rhythm problems and heart failure may occur, especially in people with increased risk of heart disease, infection or past heart rhythm problems. New or worsening high blood pressure, new cancers and tumor lysis that can result in kidney failure, irregular heartbeat and seizure can occur.
“Diarrhea commonly occurs. Drink plenty of fluid. Tell your doctor if you have signs of bleeding, infection, heart problems, persistent diarrhea or any other side effects.”
The main character then announces:
“I am living with CLL and living proof that Imbruvica is right for me.”
The ad closes by urging viewers to:
“ask your doctor if it’s right for you.”
Ads for Cancer Drugs Don’t Tell You How Much Longer!
Exactly how much longer a person with CLL can live with this treatment is a critical question that is not answered in the commercial.
The company does flash this summary on the screen:
“In a clinical trial, 8% of CLL patients on Imbruvica died versus 16% taking a chemotherapy (chlorambucil) after 28 months of median follow-up.”
That sounds impressive.
But an oncologist writing for STAT (May 2, 2019) notes:
“The treatment chosen for the control arm of the RESONATE-2 trial was chlorambucil, a drug that had repeatedly been beaten by alternatives and isn’t commonly used by practicing hematologists [for CLL].”
A Specialist Speaks Out About Ads for Cancer Drugs:
We interviewed renowned hematologist-oncologist, Vinay Prasad, MD, MPH, on our nationally syndicated public radio show last year. We asked him about his reaction to ads for cancer drugs.
He responded:
“You are seeing ads that say if you have non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer, ask your doctor if immunotherapy is right for you. That’s a really small group of people.
“How on earth can the company justify having an ad for such a small group of people? It raises the possibility you’re going to ask that of your doctor and there’s some evidence to suggest that kind of request may more likely lead to the prescription of those products…
The Cost of Advertised Drugs:
“It says something about the cost of these drugs that you can advertise to everybody for just a small group of people watching the TV. It speaks to just how much these drugs cost, how expensive they are…
“The next thing it speaks to is whether or not the average person watching TV who may have lung cancer knows if they have the particular type of lung cancer the TV commercial is talking about. They may not know if it applies to them…
“I guess I don’t know if people are empowered or if they are misled by this information. Are they put on a better path or are they put on a path that’s meandering and takes them away from best care?”
TV Ads for Cancer Drugs?
One lung cancer drug, Keytruda (pembrolizumab), is for:
“…non-small cell lung cancer that has spread. Keytruda can be used for adults who test positive for PD-L1 and whose tumors do not have an abnormal EGFR or ALK gene.”
This reinforces Dr. Prasad’s point about how difficult it would be for a patient to know if this drug would be appropriate.
Keytruda could cost as much as $12,500 a month. If someone’s insurance does not cover it, they’re in a terrible bind. They’ve been told this wonderful medicine could help them live longer, but few people can afford to fork over that kind of money.
Then there are the side effects.
The announcer warns people that Keytruda can:
“…cause the immune system to attack healthy parts of your body. This can happen during or after treatment and may be severe or lead to death.”
The rapid-fire list of other side effects is long:
“New or worse cough, chest pain, shortness of breath, diarrhea, severe stomach pain or tenderness, nausea or vomiting, rapid heartbeat, increased hunger or thirst, constipation, dizziness or fainting, changes in urine or eyesight, muscle pain or weakness, joint pain, confusion or memory problems, fever, rash, itching or flushing. These are not all the possible side effects.”
Big Pharma’s Perspective:
Elisabeth Rosenthal, MD, is a journalist, best selling author and Editor-in-Chief of KHN (Kaiser Health News).
In a New York Times article titled “Ask Your Doctor if This Ad is Right for You,” (Feb. 27, 2016) Dr. Rosenthal got the pharmaceutical industry perspective:
“Holly Campbell, a spokeswoman for PhRMA, the pharmaceutical manufacturers trade association, said that advertisements help patients make better decisions. Drug makers are ‘designing their advertising to provide scientifically accurate information to help patients better understand their health care and treatment options,’ she said.”
Informed Consumers?
We are all for helping patients make better decisions. The question we are asking is: do ads for cancer drugs that last a minute or two accomplish that goal?
A Commercial for Piqray:
The beginning of this prescription drug ad is a grabber:
“They say life is all about making choices. Well, I didn’t choose metastatic breast cancer. Not the exact type. Not this specific mutation.”
While the patient’s voice says “not this specific mutation,” the message on the screen flashes for two or three seconds:
PIK3CA gene mutation and
“Phosphatidylinositol-3-kinase catalytic subunit alpha (PIK3CA).”
Then the voice says:
“But I did pick hope”
On the screen are the large letters PIQ
The viewer is told that the treatment “goes right at it.”
The announcer tells us to discover Piqray:
“The first and only treatment that specifically targets PIK3CA mutations in HR positive, HER2 negative MBC [metastatic breast cancer] which are common and lead to cancer growth.”
Then the announcer speeds through the “serious side effects,” which include:
“Severe allergic and skin reactions, high blood sugar levels and diarrhea that are common and can be severe, and lung problems known as pneumonitis…Common side effects include rash, nausea, tiredness and weakness, decreased appetite, mouth sores, vomiting, weight loss, hair loss and changes in certain blood tests.”
The commercial ends with the words:
“Ask your doctor about Piqray”
Are Ads for Cancer Drugs Appropriate?
In our opinion, the FDA should reconsider allowing commercials on television for drugs to treat cancer, multiple sclerosis or other challenging diseases. An informed oncologist should be up-to-speed on the best treatments for any given form of cancer.
Patients should not be expected to make therapeutic decisions based on short TV ads for cancer drugs. After all, doctors need years to master the best treatments for complicated conditions. How can patients determine if a medication they see advertised for 60 to 90 seconds is right for them?
We call on the FDA to reevaluate its permissive stance on such advertising. Oncologists don’t need patients to tell them which drugs to prescribe. We asked the FDA if it approves a) the wording and b) the visual presentation (images) of prescription drug commercials.
The agency’s answer shocked us:
“No. FDA does not approve the wording and/or visual presentation of every DTC [direct to consumer] prescription drug advertisement. Pre-approval of promotional labeling or advertising (‘promotional communications’) is not required except in rare instances.”
Do You Approve of Ads for Cancer Drugs on Television?
What do you think? Share your thoughts about ads for cancer drugs and other Rx medications in the comment section below. Are you interested in joining our effort to end deceptive drug commercials on television? If so, please add a comment below. When we launch our campaign we will let you know.
A small favor please. If you found this message worthwhile, would you be willing to share it with friends and family members? If so, please scroll to the top of the page and click on the icons for email, Twitter or Facebook. While you are doing it, please consider encouraging your contacts to sign up for our free online newsletter at this link. Thank you for supporting our work.
Peggy
I think all the ads for drugs should be barred from television. Some people are so gullible they buy anything before really checking into it and finding out what the pros and cons are of that particular item.
Doctors can tell you what you need or don’t need for your body if you tell them all the problems that you are having. If you eat right, not junk food or fast foods, you won’t need a lot of these ads that are being sent to you. If you eat right you don’t need blood pressure medication, or anything to lower your blood sugar. There are foods that will take care of this but you have to be regular in the use of these foods. You cannot eat well one day and fast or eat junk food the next day because that doesn’t work.
I don’t take any pills that were prescribed for me. Instead, I went on the internet and got all the information on the foods that help and that’s what I do. I am healthy. All my numbers are like they should be.
Wendi
The ads merely further the culture of prescription medicine that permeating our country. Drug companies assume that people are stupid and will blindly follow any type of advice if you make it look pretty and comforting, such as a picnic with family or time spent with a pet, etc. Most people I know are not stupid and find the ads offensive and disruptive.
Of course, one of the worst aspects (for me at least) is that they have you thinking (and worrying) about things like cancer and heart attacks and strokes all the time and feeling anxiety about them instead of enjoying life. Constant reminders of all that could befall us. Stress inducing.
Ron
Drug advertisements (especially cancer advertisements) are a gross “mis-leading” marketing scam in the U.S.
The FDA and/or Congress must step-forward and regulate these companies!
TW
No drugs are appropriate for tv. Allowing drug advertising was a huge mistake that needs to be corrected.
Laura
I highly resent these drug ads on TV. They show people with very serious diseases looking so healthy and happy – making it look like they were cured by this “unnameable” drug. It is very misleading.
Not to mention having to sit through minutes of the ads every time the TV is turned on and to watch them frolic about while a list of very serious and dangerous side effects are rapidly and quietly read- hoping you aren’t listening to that part of the ad.
Cinthia
I am against these ads. They cause more confusion. I would trust an oncologist before I would trust a pharmaceutical company charging way too much for these drugs.
Deb
I am against these ads. My husband of 29.5 years died of metastatic bladder cancer. We had people who were trying to be helpful, pointing out these different ads for treatment options. It only caused confusion about if we were doing the right thing for his care.
Tori
It is appalling that these ads are allowed on TV. As another writer stated, they are predatory and misleading.
Jeff
This article was full of advertisements for cancer treatments.
Someone who manages the business side of peoplespharmacy needs to review their revenue sharing relationships and decide how much they really want to appear to be ‘just like the politicians”
Joe Graedon
Jeff,
Please see our response to Michael with a similar complaint:
It is incredibly annoying to see ads for prescription drugs on our website. We absolutely agree. Sadly, we have no control of the ads that appear on our website. We have repeatedly tried to get our “ad server” to eliminate ALL drug ads! It seems to be impossible. And it just shows you how sophisticated the ad servers are to match the content of an article to an advertisement by a drug company.
We wish that we do not have to accept any advertising on our website…but we are a mom and pop shoestring operation. Without advertising this website would not be able to exist. There is one option though. We ask people who value the website to go ad-free. You can do this for $5/month. If enough people subscribed to the ad-free option at this link:
https://www.peoplespharmacy.com/go-ad-free
we could eliminate those annoying ads! Another option, donate to support our work:
https://www.peoplespharmacy.com/donate
If enough people donate periodically we could get rid of ads.
So far, though, we do not have enough support to eliminate advertising. Sorry!
Elena
Agree totally. I look forward to your campaign against the horror that drug advertising on TV has become. I’ll support it.
Betty
I am totally in agreement that prescription drug commercials should be banned in the United States. The advertising is predatory and misleading. The money that big Pharma puts into drug commercials could be used so much more humanely to actually help irradicate some illnesses. They should be held accountable for the aftereffects.
Michael
It’s ironic that as I was reading this column online it was interspersed with ads for various cancer treatments…
Joe Graedon
It is incredibly annoying. We absolutely agree. Sadly, we have no control of the ads that appear on our website. We have repeatedly tried to get our “ad server” to eliminate ALL drug ads! It seems to be impossible. And it just shows you how sophisticated the ad servers are to match the content of an article to an advertisement by a drug company.
We wish that we do not have to accept any advertising on our website…but we are a mom and pop shoestring operation. Without advertising this website would not be able to exist. There is one option though. We ask people who value the website to go ad-free. You can do this for $5/month. If enough people subscribed to the ad-free option at this link:
https://www.peoplespharmacy.com/go-ad-free
we could eliminate those annoying ads! Another option, donate to support our work:
https://www.peoplespharmacy.com/donate
If enough people donate periodically we could get rid of ads.
So far, though, we do not have enough support to eliminate advertising. Sorry!
Kathleen
Please stop these ads. They may not be illegal, but they are immoral.
And they should be illegal.
Start with drugs for cancer, autoimmune diseases, and any drug costing more than $50 per month.
Put the advertising dollars into lowering the cost of all prescription drugs.
Mac
Let’s just recognize these “ads” for what they really are: which is limiting liability. Successful lawsuits against drug companies have been successful by showing that they didn’t disclose what they knew about risk and side affects.
Judy
TV ads for prescription meds for many different illnesses are not only misleading, they increase the cost of all meds. Plus they are a big pain to have to watch on TV. People desperate for cures often believe their claims. It is past time to ban them from TV.
Arlene
The drug ads are HORRIBLE ! They present smiling happy people playing in the park or whatever and having a great time while the devastating side effects are mentioned in a low voice or in tiny print at the bottom. These constant ads – many times an hour on every channel are a form of brain washing ! GET RID OF THEM. Also using cartoon characters for some – terrible.
Big Pharma must be paying the FDA huge amounts to be able to do this and the cost of millions of tv ads must be making the cost of the drugs go way up.
George
If the drug companies did not spend millions on advertising, perhaps our costs of purchasing their products would not be so outrageously high!
Maria
I absolutely agree with you that these ads should not be allowed! As bad as these are, I would also love for you to tackle the incredibly misleading ads about Medicare we have been subjected to this last year. Keep up the good work.
Victoria
I have long thought perscription drug ads should be banned as consumers are not qualified to prescribe and the economics around opportunity costs. The millions spent on ads could be deployed to much higher purposes such as wages, R&D, public health…..
Mike
It is a sad day when the FDA and CDC have become a tool of big Pharma.
Lexy
And what exactly is the Food and Drug Administration doing to protect Americans against this perniciousness? Not a damn thing; they are ENABLING big Pharma. The FDA is corrupt, and the congresspeople who take their contribution$ are corrupt. This is the real battle. How do We the People take back our FDA and stop Big Pharma from funding Congress? Any ideas are welcome.
Sue
Absolutely not! I firmly believe big pharma should NOT be allowed to advertise on tv!
Nancy
All this advertising to impressionable patients who don’t have medical educations smacks of Sackler-type pressure tactics to sell sell sell. Rx drugs should not ever be advertised to the general public and especially not on TV or on media feeds. Just say no to rx drug advertising. Get it off TV radio and my Twitter feed.
DW
NO, I do not think the drug manufacturers should advertise drugs, at all, on any medium!
When I see these ads, I routinely use a handy app on my phone to check the cost of the drug. As a rule, these drugs are not affordable.
I think this practice is deceiving and cheesy. It bleeds greed.
Erwin
I am appalled every time I see all “ask your doctor ads.” They are inappropriate and dangerous. Just the ad disclaimer and possible reactions to taking the drugs is reason enough to stop the pharmaceutical companies from advertising. These ads must stop
Kelli
Ads for drugs should not be allowed on TV for any reason. The FDA should change their stance on big Pharma and tell them no more ads. However it does make you want to know why they give permission for these ads? And why do they approve drugs that have side effects that seem worse than the disease? Is the FDA too cozy with big Pharma?
Alta
There should be no prescription drugs ads on TV. Period! I have RA and pay attention to the quickly shown side effects in those commercials. No thanks, I’d rather deal with my problems and pain.
Nancy
I think that no commercials advertising cancer or any other disease medication should be on TV.
Nor commercials about hospitals for that matter! Thank You.
Mary
I am definitely interested in supporting efforts to eliminate drug ads. I believe that big pharma has many in power under their influence, so whether this effort could be successful is questionable. I also think that the advent of these drug ads has coincided with physicians’ tendencies to medicate, without a lot of consideration about side effects, rather than explore other options. Whether there’s a cause-effect situation with this is not clear, but it is concerning.
Patsy
I wholeheartedly agree with all these comments. It’s disgusting what Big Pharma is doing to those who are very, very sick. Making their commercials so attractive, happy, and hopeful, breaks my heart. Years ago while visiting Europe I was amazed that there were no ads on tv. It was then I found out we are only 1 of 2 countries in the world allowing such torture. A month ago my husband found out he has small cell, incurable cancer. These commercials make me cry.
Deb
When I would see one of those commercials and hear all of the possible side effects I would think who in their right mind would even consider such a drug?
Recently I have been diagnosed with cancer.
My surgeon has many patients in a somewhat rural area and he does the surgeries in a hospital
three hours away. He comes here once a week for his patients. He made the recommendation for
my chemo and radiation treatments and confers with the local oncologists. I have just started the chemo part of this journey and my trust is in all three of these doctors and I have no reason to question their decisions so far. They have my trust and I know I have to be my own advocate.
I do not trust doctors who write out prescriptions without following through. My Dad was taking
eleven different pills daily and his GP was not very helpful when I questioned why he was taking so many pills. However when I conferred with
the NP at his cardiologist she was able to get his medication down to 4 pills a day. I absolutely agree there should be NO advertising for any type of drug. Doctors have enough to do without having uninformed patients tell them what medication you want. Would you tell your auto mechanic to add on an after market part that could eventually cause your engine to stall out going 65 mph down a busy highway just because it might give you a couple miles more per gallon?
Of course not! Why would you ask your doctor to possibly prescribe something that could harm your body or even cause death?
Jeri
I believe that FDA should ban such ads. These drugs are extremely costly, tv ad are only adding to this expense and can be extremely misleading and these are not for everyone. There are legitimate medical organization that provide fact based information treatment and research . I find it insulting to see ads that are a walk in the park for such serious drugs and conditions
Gaye
No ads for prescription drugs of any kind on television!!
Dell
Excellent article, but what about your unverified claims for Cocoa Via such as “boost circulation…”?
Joe Graedon
Dell,
Those claims are verified. Please check the medical literature. We have written about the science. Just search our website for CocoaVia or cocoa or chocolate.
JB
It is unfortunate that Big Pharma is allowed to coerce vulnerable people (those with serious illness) with ads that mislead with their promises of healing. It is also very suspicious that Big Pharma can spend so much money on advertising for rare diseases. Every one of these commercials further erodes my trust in medicine every time an ad comes on. Medicine has become all about profit. I trust no one in that field now to have anyone’s best interest in mind.
Barbara
I believe that commercials for drugs are inappropriate. I am one of those individuals who carefully views / listens to the side effects versus the smiling “actors” and scenes depicted in the commercials. These commercials are repulsive. They are more about the drug companies profit margins than about healing.
Kathleen
As a cancer survivor, I’m particularly sensitive to those ads. It’s what the ads DON’T say that’s pathetic – that the drug MAY give you 3 more months of misery, that you’ll “die until you die” rather than “live until you die”, and that the drug MAY totally bankrupt you while providing little. Those ads give false hope and shame on the FDA for allowing not only ads for cancer drugs but ALL drugs. Ill consumers many times hear what they WANT to hear and discard all the rest. Doctors are busy enough trying to keep pace with new drugs without patients asking for something that many times is useless.
Patty
I believe the FDA should protect the public from Big Parma’s deceptive ads – this is especially true for the most vulnerable of viewers, i. e., those who have a cancer diagnosis or who know someone who has been diagnosed (someone in their family or a friend). I feel it is unconscionable for Big Pharma to make billions of dollars in profits while at the same time manipulating cancer patients to believe they should ‘inform’ their doctors as to a prescription for them.
Patty F.
Jessica
Good Luck! I have been complaining to my legislators about this unethical situation for years, to no avail. Very few politicians have a conscience anymore, because they are addicted to Big Pharma’s massive campaign contributions (i.e., BRIBES). They can’t afford to bite the hands that feed them, and here’s a clue: it’s not their constituents. Case in point, I recently wrote to my state senator asking him to vote no on recreational marijuana, as well as no on a proposal to allow flavorings (fruit, bubble gum, chocolate, etc) in both tobacco, and vaping products. I believe these products are intended to attract teenagers, thus assuring another generation of addicts to guarantee a continued income stream. His appalling written response to me parroted the tobacco, vaping, and cannabis industries talking points: sales to underage users are still illegal; vaping products are harmless, non-addictive, and help people stop smoking; and flavored tobacco (menthol) has been legal for years. His cannabis response was: it’s legal in surrounding states; we need to keep those profits, and tax dollars [Sic: not to mention campaign contributions] here in our state.
Ross
I’m certain that drug advertising is protected by an army of well-funded lobbyists. I fully support eliminating these commercials, but feel that it’s about as likely to happen as term limits for Congress.
Joanna
The FDA is funded by user fees paid to it by pharmaceutical companies. There’s absolutely no chance that drug ads of any sort will stop cluttering our screens. Furthermore, this type of funding calls into question the entire function and purpose of the FDA—just consider their approval of the fabulously expensive drug aducanumab (for Alzheimer’s, though it has not yet been shown to alter outcomes), which may break the back of Medicare. For us to have any trust in the FDA, it needs to be independent of Big Pharma, and apparently that is not going to happen. And recall that when it comes to advertising, Big Pharma continues to spend vast sums not only on direct-to-consumer ads, but also on direct-to-physician marketing. Apparently there are a lot of lazy doctors out there who can’t be bothered to educate themselves through reliable sources. When it comes to pharmaceuticals, regardless of what the ads or even the physicians say, let the buyer beware.
LeeLa
Each of these drugs work only for very specific cancer histologies. The oncologist must have immunohistochemical and genetic testing performed on the tumor to determine if the drug will even work for a patient.
Unfortunately, some cancer patients who do not get a Dr. TV drug prescribed on demand waste valuable time doctor shopping while their cancer progresses. These ads are dangerous and in some instances deadly.
Will
Only adds to the wild overpricing of the products. Doctors should be making these decisions, and I guess, get the “information” that the ads purport to advance.
I , of course, tune them all out just like the endless political ads.
There is a trend lately to distrust experts in all fields, and that is what these ads play to.
Deborah
Exactly why ads for prescription drugs were ever allowed on television begs the larger question of who is controlling political purse strings. I do not know anyone who is not SICK of these pharmaceutical ads. They are a total waste of time and money and are just one more reason our prescription drugs are so ridiculously expensive. We would all be happier without the constant inundation of reminders about serious illnesses and drug side effects.
Laura
There should be NO ads allowed for prescription drugs. Wonder how much cheaper the drugs would be if the drug companies didn’t spend all that money to advertise. But then the drug companies would really put the screws to the doctors to prescribe their drugs.
Jackie
Thank you for bringing this to the attention of your readers. Now, what can we do to get it stopped? It is ridiculous. I have made fun of those commercials for years, especially when they talk about possible medication side effects which, you would think, would kill any desire to seek it out. It boggles the mind that some folks actually ask their physicians for a particular drug they have seen advertised on TV.
Linda
I haven’t watched TV for more than 20 years, so I don’t have to endure many of these “ads” — but they are definitely proliferating on streaming sites such as hulu. I rarely watch them there, either — but have watched a few just to understand what the heck they’re hacking now… I’ve learned to ignore most ads — for pharmaceuticals and for just about everything else being crammed down consumers’ throats… There are no effective consumer advocates in government anymore — that’s a given.
Dino
I will never accept ads for drugs, no matter what the disease is. It is dangerous. The FDA should spot all ads in benefit of the public.
Gael
I agree with all the other commenters who say they should stop direct-to-consumer advertising of all prescription drugs. Ads for cancer drugs are the most egregious because the market is so small.
Kimberly A
I am so tired of seeing these ads, and it makes me wonder who got bought off to allow direct-to-consumer marketing for pharmaceutical drugs. We cannot obtain these drugs on our own without a prescription, so how is this allowed? We are told to ask our doctor about these drugs, but if you ask your doctor about specific narcotic drugs, you can go to jail.
Your article states, “In our opinion, the FDA should reconsider allowing commercials on television for drugs to treat cancer, multiple sclerosis or other challenging diseases.” This begs a deeper question. Who decided it was permissible to advertise to the consumer a product the consumer cannot purchase directly? Is this part of FDA regulations, or is it an actual codified law?
I don’t know anyone who isn’t tired of seeing these ads, and I see over and over where people voice their opinion that they do not like these drug ads, and think they should not be allowed. But just speaking our mind about it will never get it changed. It will never change unless we actually take some action to make that happen. For it to change, we have to bring our grievance to the source who can change it.
Since your statement says “the FDA should reconsider allowing commercials…,” that would seem to imply they were the ones who made the decision to allow these commercials. I believe therein lies our biggest obstacle to making them stop – too many government agencies are making rules that we do not have any recourse for getting changed when we see they are not working.
Personally, I would like to make ALL direct-to-consumer marketing of pharmaceutical drugs stop. I will now be on a mission to find out who has the power to make that happen, and I will then put my effort to doing whatever it takes to accomplish that.
NANCY
I read this article on my phone, and embedded in it were 2 ads for Humira, one for Stelara and one for Aimovig. Just sayin’…..
Joan
These constant commercials are ridiculous. Enough is enough!!! Take them off the air…for me they are just as bad as the political commercials we had to endure.
HILDA
I hate the last 15 minutes of the evening news. It is commercial after commercial, and sometimes the news commentator only announces what he/she will report on next. No news is given between the drug commercials. I have seen children repeating the commercials with the announcer as he or she speaks. They know them as well as the A,B,Cs.
I am old enough to remember when there were no drug commercials on television. We are paying for these advertisements with our own prescriptions’ elevated costs. If anyone has any idea how to put a stop to these practices, we should start writing to our Senators and Representatives.
Lois
Ads should be banned. Big Pharma has become a huge marketing machine. Pharma ads now constitute 70% of the ad revenue for TV networks. How impartial do you think TV news organizations can be about them in light of that fact? Bigger and bigger profits – not our health and well being – are their driving force. Big Pharma has hijacked the medical system and co-opted the FDA and the government. All the while digging deeper and deeper into our pocketbooks.
SANDI
They should require serious side effects and common side effects to be reported first and given equal time in commercials.
Edward
Key words in the article are “An informed oncologist should be up-to-speed…” There are so many new treatments and clinical trials I wonder if it is even possible for an oncologist to be completely up-to-speed. Perhaps the advertising serves to bring knowledge to the forefront that might otherwise be overlooked.
In any profession, some experts resent lay contributions while others welcome differing points of view.
Robert
The additional problems with advertising of cancer drugs are the number of smiling faces in every ad indicating that every person that takes this drug will have a long happy life. Then in the small print you see that their life is extended only by a few months or a year at best. Then they go through the side effects quickly while you watch smiling people enjoying life, when the reality is that their existence may be full of pain and not far removed from a vegetable. Where is the quality of life that every person should enjoy?
LeeLa
Thank you for posting this. I am a cancer data analyst, the selection and timing of treatment for cancer is very specific and requires a number of tests. I wish I had a dollar for every time I had to explain to family and friends why a so-called miriacle drug will do absolutely nothing for their particular cancer.
Patients should ask their doctors for very specific cancer stage information (how far the disease has spread), about biochemical tumor markers and ask for a copy of NCCN guidelines which outlines in detail recommended treatment.. Once armed with this info, there is nothing wrong with seeking a second opinion, but please don’t delay or doctor shop -that could be more deadly.
James
They should NOT be allowed, Ever!!!
It is commercial porn.
No ethics, pure greed!
RJ
It’s funny, while scrolling this article, I rolled over two cancer medication ads. As a cancer patient, these ads on TV and online, where I’d like a little break from the anxiety of my battle are right there in my face. It is greed, the big pharma sales people I personally know are making ridiculous salaries.
I feel these ads should be banned online and on TV.
Nan
We need to join the rest of the world and stop allowing Direct to consumer (DTC),marketing…only New Zealand has TV drug ads like ours, they are forbidden elsewhere. I am always disturbed by the proliferation of Big Pharma’s exaggerated and somewhat deceptive ads. I feel they offer false hope and may not meet the needs of many patients, who are often unaware of various problems that could arise, not to mention many MDs don’t like these requests, and ten there’s the prohibitive costs…they should stop these ads…that’s why our drugs are so costly.
Tom
My trust of anything on TV or from the FDA is below zero. Cancer drugs have done little over the last 60 years to stop the scourge of this disease, which is basically caused by a breakdown of the immune system and/or severe inflammation. Their direct causes need to be addressed before filling people full of drugs that can cause massive side effects. TV is a total waste of time because it is driven by political agendas as well as Big Pharma’s idea of having everyone become a drug addict. Therefore, they equate drug usage ( by prescription) to being healthy.
Kathleen
As a 32-year cancer survivor who volunteered with cancer patients for over twenty years, I don’t think cancer drugs (or any drugs for that matter) should be advertised. We are not scientists or medical personnel; we are people with serious disease.
Many of us when dealing with the diagnosis have “selective hearing” and are desperate for a magic solution. Some of these ads can give false hope. There is no mention of how astronomically expensive a treatment might be and that it might only add months, if that, to your life. I have seen cancer patients sruggling to the very end to stay alive when that is not possible. I have also seen those who decline further treatment & die at peace. We can “live until we die” … or we can “die until we die” and I think treatment (or no treatment) can make the difference.
Bonnie N
I agree that these drugs should not be advertised as they are. My husband was put on Keytruda for Stage 4 nsclc and, while it knocked out the cancer, the side effects (6 years later!) have been life threatening themselves. Only a highly trained oncologist can correctly and safely advise a cancer patient as to medications that should be considered for treatment.
Joanna
I am a recently retired internist with over 40 years of experience in patient care, during which I always maintained my life long medical education. There was one constant during that time: the never-ending greed of big Pharma. They’ve attempted for decades, often successfully, to essentially bribe physicians; as soon as direct-to-consumer drug ads were legalized, patients (and through them, physicians) became targeted by nonstop advertising. The American healthcare industry has one overriding goal—maximize profits. Oncology drug ads are an outrageous exploitation of desperate patients, but they’re just one piece of an entire system that needs to be rebuilt from the ground up. Patients over profits should dictate policy.
Jackie
In the U.K. (and no doubt many other countries), drug companies are not allowed to advertise. I agree with this completely. A good doctor needs to research the efficacy of any drug (new and old) before prescribing. The drug companies mention all the work they put into their research, but the horrendous cost to the public (for enormous profits), is just not viable nor humane. The efficacy of some expensive drugs, may show it helps only a small percentage of patients, but is still sold at exorbitant prices.
Gerry
For 30+ yrs as a medical school professor of pharmacology I’ve tried to help medical students understand something about the complex role of the Food & Drug Administration (FDA) to meet it’s congressional mandate of assuring drugs sold to the public are ‘safe’ and ‘effective’. Regulating “Direct-to-consumer pharmaceutical advertising” has been a constant, complex challenge increasingly favoring the drug industry (see: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3278148/). This is not only true for FDA approved drugs, but also supplements (not FDA approved) of uncertain benefit. While drug and supplement manufacturers earn tremendous amounts from their products, their advertisements also proliferate because they generate enormous sums of money for media that seems to present them with little scrutiny concerning true medical value for viewers.