• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Senators Propose Ban on Drug Advertising to Consumers

NOLA Dude

NOLA Dude

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 1, 2024
Messages
10,740
Reaction score
4,963
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Bernie Sanders and Angus King co-sponsor a bill that would prohibit consumer drug ads, echoing calls by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. during his presidential campaign

Sens. Bernie Sanders (I., Vt.) and Angus King (I., Maine) introduced a bill Thursday that would ban pharmaceutical manufacturers from using direct-to-consumer advertising, including social media, to promote their products.

The bill would prohibit any promotional communications targeting consumers, including through television, radio, print, digital platforms and social media. It will apply to all prescription drug advertisements.

“The American people don’t want to see misleading and deceptive prescription drug ads on television,” Sanders said in a statement. “They want us to take on the greed of the pharmaceutical industry and ban these bogus ads.”


Bravo to Sanders and King! This should be a bipartisan issue. Only one other country in the world allows pharmaceutical advertising on television.
 
What is the harm in that advertising?

I see them on American networks that are part of my cable package.

Thanks to that advertising I know about some new pharmaceutical developments I might not have been aware of.

And yes I know my own MD should tell me about them. Some Doctors do, some don't.
 
Fully support this

No other country has direct to consumer pharmaceutical advertising - and this would decrease expenditures by pharmaceutical companies significantly and therefore, also (hypothetically) help decrease the cost to consumers for pharmaceuticals.
 
BirdinHand said:
Fully support this

No other country has direct to consumer pharmaceutical advertising - and this would decrease expenditures by pharmaceutical companies significantly and therefore, also (hypothetically) help decrease the cost to consumers for pharmaceuticals.
Click to expand...
It would also decrease sales which might actually increase per unit prices.
 
I
Allan said:
What is the harm in that advertising?

I see them on American networks that are part of my cable package.

Thanks to that advertising I know about some new pharmaceutical developments I might not have been aware of.

And yes I know my own MD should tell me about them. Some Doctors do, some don't.
Click to expand...
No one wants to see drug ads for ring worm, rosacea, herpes or any other conditions in between programing and eating pizza.
"hey doc, I saw this awesome commercial for something called Skyrizi that might cause bleeding of the eyes and spontaneous combustion, hook me up".
Along with those sports betting commercials, get them off the air.
 
BirdinHand said:
Fully support this

No other country has direct to consumer pharmaceutical advertising - and this would decrease expenditures by pharmaceutical companies significantly and therefore, also (hypothetically) help decrease the cost to consumers for pharmaceuticals.
Click to expand...
I've not done any kind of research on this, but my assumption is that drug companies purchase ads because they believe doing so increases their long-term revenues and profits. I'm not sure why I should think that decreasing advertising opportunities would result in lower prices. Seems to give a lot of power to whatever companies make the best deals with the prescribing doctors behind the scenes.
 
Cameron said:
Why? I don't get the point of this.
Click to expand...
A few reasons.

1) Pharmaceutical companies don’t include a comprehensive list of side effects and complications in these ads.

2) The audience is inappropriate. Not being a doctor, they want you as a consumer to harangue the doctors and pharmacists who slipped the hook of their reps.
 
Allan said:
It would also decrease sales which might actually increase per unit prices.
Click to expand...
It would likely just decrease the amount of product development for drugs that are not superior to other drugs, but are replacing a drug that is going generic.
 
Anything that helps get Americans off their pharma addiction is a good thing. Americans spend ~2.5 times the OECD average on Pharma, yet have the shortest life expectancy among the wealthy countries. One of the (probably intended) side effects of constant pharma advertising is that it 'normalizes' the idea of taking pharma drugs, and we see that in American consumption rates. Pharma has become the lazy mans wellness. Don't need to lose weight, exercise more, change my diet, or change my lifestyle, just pop some more pills.
 
Napoleon said:
A few reasons.

1) Pharmaceutical companies don’t include a comprehensive list of side effects and complications in these ads.

2) The audience is inappropriate. Not being a doctor, they want you as a consumer to harangue the doctors and pharmacists who slipped the hook of their reps.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the response. But how is 1) a problem since consumers have to ask their doctor about it anyway? The doctor can and should inform them of those things before writing a prescription. As for 2), they may want you as a consumer to question the doctors who are on the hook of their competitors' reps. I think that is useful in an industry where so much shady marketing goes on behind the scenes.
 
HenryChinaski said:
I

No one wants to see drug ads for ring worm, rosacea, herpes or any other conditions in between programing and eating pizza.
"hey doc, I saw this awesome commercial for something called Skyrizi that might cause bleeding of the eyes and spontaneous combustion, hook me up".
Along with those sports betting commercials, get them off the air.
Click to expand...
I get you. I hate the athlete's foot ads.

I just see the benefit of public education for treatments that are beneficial.
 
Allan said:
What is the harm in that advertising?

I see them on American networks that are part of my cable package.

Thanks to that advertising I know about some new pharmaceutical developments I might not have been aware of.

And yes I know my own MD should tell me about them. Some Doctors do, some don't.
Click to expand...

From what I understand, the reason so many drugs in the United States is because of the cost of marketing the drugs directly to consumers and patients. As far as I am concerned, the only people who need to know about and keep up-to-date with the most-recently developed drugs are actual practitioners of medicine.
 
Gaius46 said:
Good pushing the idea that there's a pill for all your ills just evil.

And they are annoying as shit.
Click to expand...

It always seems like 1/3rd of the ads I see on TV are pharmaceuticals, the other 1/3rd are credit card commercials, and the last 1/3rd is for various kinds of pet food and kitty litter.
 
Allan said:
I get you. I hate the athlete's foot ads.

I just see the benefit of public education for treatments that are beneficial.
Click to expand...
I disagree, who the hell is going to ask their doctor about a drug that they saw on TV? They're disturbing. The pharma industry should not have that much power to be able to infect American programing.
 
Felis Leo said:
It always seems like 1/3rd of the ads I see on TV are pharmaceuticals, the other 1/3rd are credit card commercials, and the last 1/3rd is for various kinds of pet food and kitty litter.
Click to expand...
Same here. I guess we must be of an age where they figure showing us commericals of tropical
getaways with bikini clad women is a waste of money.
 
Cameron said:
Thanks for the response. But how is 1) a problem since consumers have to ask their doctor about it anyway? The doctor can and should inform them of those things before writing a prescription. As for 2), they may want you as a consumer to question the doctors who are on the hook of their competitors' reps. I think that is useful in an industry where so much shady marketing goes on behind the scenes.
Click to expand...
Why would pharma companies engage in direct to consumer advertising if it didn't increase their sales beyond what they otherwise would be if they just marketed to doctors?
 
Cameron said:
Thanks for the response. But how is 1) a problem since consumers have to ask their doctor about it anyway? The doctor can and should inform them of those things before writing a prescription. As for 2), they may want you as a consumer to question the doctors who are on the hook of their competitors' reps. I think that is useful in an industry where so much shady marketing goes on behind the scenes.
Click to expand...
The problem with that is doctors don’t make money by treating the sniffles. They make money by pushing pharmaceutical products in exchange for a slice of the profits. Doctors aren’t just doctors - they’re salesmen. As such, they don’t always act in the best interest of the patient. Hence the opioid crisis.

We shouldn’t be contributing to that by inspiring consumers who don’t know what they’re talking about to pressure doctors and pharmacists for prescriptions.
 
NOLA Dude said:
Bernie Sanders and Angus King co-sponsor a bill that would prohibit consumer drug ads, echoing calls by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. during his presidential campaign

Sens. Bernie Sanders (I., Vt.) and Angus King (I., Maine) introduced a bill Thursday that would ban pharmaceutical manufacturers from using direct-to-consumer advertising, including social media, to promote their products.

The bill would prohibit any promotional communications targeting consumers, including through television, radio, print, digital platforms and social media. It will apply to all prescription drug advertisements.

“The American people don’t want to see misleading and deceptive prescription drug ads on television,” Sanders said in a statement. “They want us to take on the greed of the pharmaceutical industry and ban these bogus ads.”


Bravo to Sanders and King! This should be a bipartisan issue. Only one other country in the world allows pharmaceutical advertising on television.
Click to expand...


All I can say is, I am really sick of being BOMBARDED all day long with literally HUNDREDS of back to back pharma ads.
But the most ridiculous part is, all these ads have somber black box warnings where the voice-over warns of serious side effects, and Americans rush out and buy these drugs anyway.

But just WHISPER the WORD "VACCINE" and half the country loses their shit.

rage-meme (1).gif

I keep saying that they should have marketed the vaccines the way they market WeGovy or Rixulti.
 
Napoleon said:
The problem with that is doctors don’t make money by treating the sniffles. They make money by pushing pharmaceutical products in exchange for a slice of the profits. Doctors aren’t just doctors - they’re salesmen. As such, they don’t always act in the best interest of the patient. Hence the opioid crisis.
Click to expand...
I agree with all of that, I guess I just think banning direct-to-consumer advertising puts consumers more at the mercy of salesman/drug-pushing doctors. They are less likely to be aware of and ask their doctors about alternative options.

I'd rather ban the other kind of advertising you are talking about.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom