AMA Calls for Ban on Direct to Consumer Advertising of Prescription Drugs and Medical Devices
[center]AMA Calls for Ban on Direct to Consumer Advertising of Prescription Drugs and Medical Devices[/center]
For immediate release:
Nov. 17, 2015
ATLANTA Responding to the billions of advertising dollars being spent to promote prescription products, physicians at the Interim Meeting of the American Medical Association (AMA) today adopted new policy aimed at driving solutions to make prescription drugs more affordable.
Physicians cited concerns that a growing proliferation of ads is driving demand for expensive treatments despite the clinical effectiveness of less costly alternatives.
Todays vote in support of an advertising ban reflects concerns among physicians about the negative impact of commercially-driven promotions, and the role that marketing costs play in fueling escalating drug prices, said AMA Board Chair-elect Patrice A. Harris, M.D., M.A. Direct-to-consumer advertising also inflates demand for new and more expensive drugs, even when these drugs may not be appropriate.
The United States and New Zealand are the only two countries in the world that allow direct-to-consumer advertising of prescription drugs. Advertising dollars spent by drug makers have increased by 30 percent in the last two years to $4.5 billion, according to the market research firm Kantar Media.
New AMA policy also calls for convening a physician task force and launching an advocacy campaign to promote prescription drug affordability by demanding choice and competition in the pharmaceutical industry, and greater transparency in prescription drug prices and costs.
Physicians strive to provide the best possible care to their patients, but increases in drug prices can impact the ability of physicians to offer their patients the best drug treatments, said Dr. Harris. Patient care can be compromised and delayed when prescription drugs are unaffordable and subject to coverage limitations by the patients health plan. In a worst-case scenario, patients forego necessary treatments when drugs are too expensive.
New AMA policy responds to deepened concerns that anticompetitive behavior in a consolidated pharmaceutical marketplace has the potential to increase drug prices. The AMA will encourage actions by federal regulators to limit anticompetitive behavior by pharmaceutical companies attempting to reduce competition from generic manufacturers through manipulation of patent protections and abuse of regulatory exclusivity incentives.
The AMA will also monitor pharmaceutical company mergers and acquisitions, as well as the impact of such actions on drug prices. Patent reform is a key area for encouraging greater market-based competition and new AMA policy will support an appropriate balance between incentives for innovation on the one hand and efforts to reduce regulatory and statutory barriers to competition as part of the patent system.
Last month, the Kaiser Family Foundation released a report saying that a high cost of prescription drugs remains the publics top health care priority. In the past few years, prices on generic and brand-name prescription drugs have steadily risen and experienced a 4.7 percent spike in 2015, according to the Altarum Institute Center for Sustainable Health Spending.
The AMAs new policy recognizes that the promotion of transparency in prescription drug pricing and costs will help patients, physicians and other stakeholders understand how drug manufacturers set prices. If there is greater understanding of the factors that contribute to prescription drug pricing, including the research, development, manufacturing, marketing and advertising costs borne by pharmaceutical companies, then the marketplace can react appropriately.
Buzz cook
(2,472 posts)Seems to have changed a bit, from the organization that killed National Health Care reform under Truman. It's starting to see the bad effects of policies they use to support and I suspect their starting to feel the bite in the wallet from ceding power to big pharm and hmos.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)They can no longer practice the kind of medicine they were taught to practice and that most doctors want to practice. Doctors do not like HMOs and insurance straitjackets.
Some years ago I met the doctor (neurologic radiologist) husband of a work colleague. Strong Republican of the old country-club school. I just about fell out of my shoes when he stated, out of the blue, that he was a strong supporter of single-payer. I asked why. He responded that (1) His practice wasted countless doctor/nurse/staff hours trying to deal with the hundreds of different kinds of forms, all of which took valuable time away from patient care; (2) any money lost in fees would be replaced if not well exceeded by the enormous increase in the efficiency of his practice group - more patients could be seen and given proper attention and paperwork would be standardized; and (3) "We could all practice better medicine under single payer."
cui bono
(19,926 posts)That's a no brainer. Was from day 1.
KT2000
(20,584 posts)on TV and print/internet media. They serve no purpose other than brainwashing people to tell their doctors what to prescribe - the newest, most expensive medications. Just think of all the money they could invest in R&D! and reduce the prices.
mpcamb
(2,871 posts)KT2000
(20,584 posts)that's my favorite!
msongs
(67,420 posts)I am sure the medical pros would love to get rid of them
murielm99
(30,745 posts)My former primary care provider used to be very curt with them. I respected him for that.
I am sorry that he has left the practice where I go.
I don't know how other docs react, but it may tell you something about how they feel.
Fuddnik
(8,846 posts)I always tried to get the first appointment in the morning, and there would be a pack of them in there passing out donuts, breakfast sandwiches, and coffee to all the staff.
And he always had a pill to cure everything. Usually a new, expensive pill.
My wife had elevated cholesterol, and he prescribed some new wonder drug. She never filled the prescription, but switched to healthier eating habits, and took off 40 pounds. Cholesterol was normal.
Next appointment, he never mentioned the weight loss, but said "See how good that medicine worked"?
That Guy 888
(1,214 posts)It would be nice not to have a cialus commercial right before dinner
Surya Gayatri
(15,445 posts)astonished and disgusted to observe the blatant commercialization of pharmaceuticals on US media.
This says it all really:
bemildred
(90,061 posts)proverbialwisdom
(4,959 posts)Pharma's ad spend vaults to $4.5B, with big spender Pfizer leading the way
March 25, 2015 | By Tracy Staton
Suspicions are confirmed: Pharma's spending on ads took a flying leap last year. By Kantar Media's numbers, direct-to-consumer ad spend hit $4.53 billion in 2014, up about 18% from $3.83 billion in 2013.
That total beats the last several years handily, and for ad agencies and media outlets, marks a heartening recovery from the $3.47 billion trough in 2012. It's higher than the $4.17 billion spent in 2010 and higher than the $4.43 billion total in 2008. And while it's not exactly in the neighborhood of the $5.4 billion spent in 2006--the DTC peak--it's at least in the same city.
One drugmaker was responsible for a big chunk of that increase. In fact, one drugmaker ranked among the top 10 advertisers of any kind, ahead of Verizon ($VZ), Toyota ($TM) and Chrysler, and just a hair behind L'Oreal. And in terms of year-over-year growth, that drugmaker beat out all its fellow top advertisers, with a 23% leap in 2014 spending
<>
Its true: Drug companies are bombarding your TV with more ads than ever
By Jason Millman, March 23, 2015
The soft, cheesy music. Happy, smiling middle-aged couples playing sports almost effortlessly. The docile tones of a narrator ticking off a mind-numbing list of side effects ranging from mundane to terrifying.
Maybe you've noticed that prescription drug ads are everywhere these days more so than usual. You wouldn't be wrong.
It was just a few years ago that TV advertisements of prescription drugs had dropped off by 20 percent, as drugmakers were also cutting back on other types of direct-to-consumer advertising. Those days are over, though, according to figures provided by Kantar Media, a market research firm.
Drugmakers in 2014 spent $4.5 billion marketing prescription drugs, up from $3.5 billion in 2012. That's also up from the $2.5 billion drugmakers spent in 2000, or $3.39 billion in 2015 dollars when adjusted for inflation.
<>
Neither article mentions the 3rd rail pharmaceutical category, interestingly.
SunSeeker
(51,574 posts)They in essence are telling people to pressure their doctors for a particular drug, instead of trusting your doctor's medical advice.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)proverbialwisdom
(4,959 posts)Health | Tue Nov 17, 2015 6:37pm EST
U.S. doctor group calls for ban on drug advertising to consumers
BY SUSAN KELLY
The American Medical Association on Tuesday called for a ban on advertising prescription drugs and medical devices directly to consumers, saying the ads drive patients to demand expensive treatments over less costly ones that are also effective.
<>
U.S. Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton has proposed cracking down on direct-to-consumer advertising and other measures to stop what she called "price gouging" by pharmaceutical companies. Clinton's plan would prevent companies from deducting what they spend on direct-to-consumer ads from their tax bills.
A series of court decisions has determined the ads cannot be banned outright because they are a form of commercial speech protected by the U.S. Constitution. The AMA did not address how the ban could be accomplished without being overturned in court.
PhRMA, the largest U.S. trade group for the pharmaceutical industry, said the ads increase consumer awareness of available treatments for diseases, including undiagnosed conditions.
<>