Skip 
Navigation Link

1215 South Walnut Ave.
Demopolis, AL 36732 map map 

Access to Care: 334.289.2410

Health Policy & Advocacy
Resources
Basic InformationMore InformationLatest News
Red Cross Needs Type O Blood to Ease ShortageLess Pain, More Car Crashes: Legalized Marijuana a Mixed BagPolitical Controversies Could Fuel Bullying of LGBT Youth: StudyCBD -- It's Everywhere, But Does It Work?Brief EMS Training Saves Lives After Brain InjuryU.S. Improves Emergency Readiness, but Gaps PersistSlowing Climate Change Could Cut Health Costs, Save MoneyDispensing Opioid Antidote Without a Prescription Might Save LivesNot Just Opioids: Deaths Tied to Cocaine, Meth Are Soaring, TooMost Americans Hit Hard by Medical BillsYour Virtual Doctor Will 'See' You NowHigh Measles Rates Mean Kids, Adults Need Proper Vaccination: CDCMany Drivers Testing Positive for Marijuana, Even With Kids in CarMedicaid Could Save $2.6 Billion a Year With Dip in SmokingFDA Halts All Sales of Pelvic Mesh Products Tied to Injuries in WomenAnother Cost of the Opioid Epidemic: Billions of Dollars in Lost TaxesHealth Tip: Using an AEDNurse Practitioners Often Restricted From Prescribing Opioid TreatmentsForested Counties Have Lower Medicare Costs, Study FindsSimple CPR Doubles Survival OddsUninsured Get Short Shrift on Hospital StaysSpecial Bag Helps Patients Get Rid of Unused OpioidsHealth Tip: Responsibilities of Non-VaccinationDo Doctors Hounded by Malpractice Claims Just Shift Their Practice Elsewhere?Bans on Texting While Behind the Wheel Making Roads SaferColorado Sees Spike in ER Visits After Pot Made LegalMajor Medical Groups Call for Soda TaxesCould the U.S. Mail Deliver Better Colon Cancer Screening Rates?Opioid Rxs Decreasing, But Not for All DoctorsAfter Chinese Infant Gene-Editing Scandal, U.S. Health Officials Join Call for a BanAre 'Inactive' Ingredients in Your Drugs Really So Harmless?Need to Be Vaccinated? Try Your Local PharmacyBystanders Key to Cutting Cardiac Arrest DeathsMany Black Americans Live in Trauma Care 'Deserts'FDA Issues Asbestos Warning About Some Claire's Cosmetic ProductsFDA to Crack Down on Retailers That Keep Selling Tobacco to KidsBlood Donation by Teen Girls May Raise Anemia RiskNurses' Long Hours, Moonlighting Could Pose Patient Safety RiskBerkeley's Efforts Suggest Soda Taxes Do Cut Soda SalesOpioid Overdose Deaths Quadruple, Centered in 8 StatesPayments for Research Can Lead to Lies: StudyFDA Aims to Strengthen Sunscreen RulesAre Primary Care Doctors Prepared to Discuss Cancer Treatment?FDA Fell Short in Preventing Fentanyl Abuse Crisis, Report ClaimsPrimary Care Doctors Help Boost Life Spans, But More Are NeededMore Car Crashes Tied to Drivers High on OpioidsPoor Whites Bear the Brunt of U.S. Opioid Crisis, Studies FindFDA to Tighten Oversight of SupplementsAs U.S. Measles Outbreaks Spread, Why Does 'Anti-Vax' Movement Persist?Even Brief EMS Delay Can Cost Lives After Car Crash
Questions and AnswersVideosLinksBook Reviews
Related Topics

Health Insurance
Healthcare

As Medical Marketing Soars, Is Regulation Needed?

HealthDay News
by By Amy Norton
HealthDay Reporter
Updated: Jan 8th 2019

new article illustration

TUESDAY, Jan. 8, 2019 (HealthDay News) -- Turn on prime-time TV and you'll likely see a pitch for arthritis or impotence pills, and maybe a cancer center. Advertisers spent nearly $10 billion marketing prescription drugs and medical services to the American public in 2016 -- five times what they doled out 20 years earlier, a new study finds.

Experts said the results raise questions about the influence of advertising over how Americans see their health and make health-care decisions.

The study analyzed trends in "medical marketing" between 1997 and 2016, looking at TV and digital advertising, social media and more.

Medical marketing includes ads directed to consumers: Many are for prescription drugs, but others tout treatments, tests and various services offered by hospitals, clinics and other health providers. It also includes marketing to doctors by drug companies and lab test manufacturers.

In 2016, the study found, those advertisers spent almost $30 billion marketing to professionals and the public. That was up two-thirds from 1997, when the figure stood at $17.7 billion.

And while companies still devote more money to courting providers, spending on consumer ads rose at a much greater rate -- from $2.1 billion in 1997, to $9.6 billion in 2016. The findings were published Jan. 8 in the Journal of the American Medical Association.

"It's an impressive amount of money -- and it's because companies know it works," said study co-author Dr. Steven Woloshin, a professor at the Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice.

The problem, said Woloshin, is that by nature, ads tell consumers that the product is "good." Prescription drug ads mention side effects -- in a quick voiceover in a TV commercial, for instance -- but they do not quantify the benefits versus risks.

"People don't realize that even though a drug is approved by the [U.S.] Food and Drug Administration, it may only be marginally effective," Woloshin said.

Nor do ads mention the alternatives for treating a particular condition -- which may be cheaper or drug-free, he noted.

"That's not to say that marketing is always bad," Woloshin pointed out.

It may help lift the "stigma" attached to conditions like HIV or depression, he said, or help people get appropriate tests or treatments.

There's a flip side, though: overdiagnosis and overtreatment.

Woloshin mentioned a study where researchers had actors go to primary care doctors portraying symptoms of either major depression or adjustment disorder. Some specifically asked for an antidepressant, citing something they'd seen on TV.

The result: People who asked for medication were more likely to get it, even when they did not report depression symptoms.

"Marketing can have benefits, but also harms," Woloshin said. "That's why we need strong regulation."

However, the study found little evidence that regulation has kept pace with the explosion in marketing. According to Woloshin, the FDA has taken some action in recent years -- to curtail marketing of unapproved genetic tests that promise to reveal your risks of developing various diseases.

But the public might be surprised by how little regulatory oversight there is, said Meredith Rosenthal, a professor of health economics at the Harvard School of Public Health.

"Don't assume an ad has been reviewed and blessed by the FDA," said Rosenthal, co-author of an editorial published with the study.

The FDA can act when an ad's content violates law, she noted. But it does not put a stamp of approval on every ad.

In theory, Rosenthal said, doctors are the "bulwark," steering patients away from inappropriate treatments, even if they demand them. But, she noted, doctors are targeted by marketers, too, or may advertise services themselves.

Plus, Woloshin said, even when doctors try to convince patients that lifestyle changes, for example, are a better option, they can end up fighting a losing battle.

For now, he and Rosenthal suggested the public regard medical ads with a healthy dose of skepticism.

That includes "disease awareness campaigns," which are often funded by drug companies, Woloshin said.

Again, Woloshin said, that kind of marketing can have benefits, but also harms when campaigns try to expand a disease definition and "medicalize" normal experience. He cited "low testosterone" as one example.

"Some people say we should ban [medical marketing]," Woloshin said. "But that's not going to happen, because of the First Amendment. What we need is stronger regulation."

More information

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has a guide for consumers on prescription drug advertising.