Some national lawmakers want to eliminate or restrict the $4.3 billion-a-year advertising of prescription drugs to consumers via the airwaves in the name of reducing health care costs.
The direct-to-consumer advertising is meant to fuel sales by urging viewers and listeners to "ask your doctor" about the phamaceutical company's latest drug treatment. Last year, the $4.3 billion spent on direct-to-consumer advertising was second only to advertising on automobiles.
Rep. James Martin wants to eliminate the ads, while Rep. Jerrold Nadler has suggested amending the tax code to prevent companies from deducting the cost of the ads as a business expense, USA Today reported.
Rep. Henry Waxman has suggested preventing firms from adverstising a drug for a specific time period after its use was approved by Food and Drug Administration.
Adverstisers say the restrictions are unfair and infringe on their free speech rights.
"The ads are firmly rooted in freedom of commercial speech," said John Mack, publisher of online Pharma Marketing News.
Critics of the proposed restrictions say the ads do not raise the cost of health care while their visibility makes them an easy target. Advertisers argue the ads are regulated now by the FDA, which has stepped up enforcement against false or misleading content.
Thomas Abrams, director of the FDA's division of drug marketing, advertising and communications, said they have devoted more resources to reviewing ads "to prevent a misleading message from being disseminated in the first place."
The ads are also boosting sales and adding to revenue of television networks and publishers, who have joined the opposition with a letter to Rep. Charles Rangel, chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, who supports the tax code amendment.
Like other advertisements, the drug ads serve their purpose. They make viewers aware and spark consumer interest in new products. The information is available in other formats, and banning it from television ads would serve no useful purpose.