Resolving the War on Pharmaceutical Advertisements

RESOLVING THE WAR ON PHARMACEUTICAL ADVERTISEMENTS1

Resolving the War on Pharmaceutical Advertisements

Following the Guidelines of the American Psychological Association Style Guide

Name

Professor

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to discuss the on-going war on pharmaceutical drug advertisements and how this correlates with the field of Forensic Psychology. The existing pharmaceutical campaigns that exist in the media as well as how they affect the Forensic Psychology field will be discussed. The discussion of the positive aspects, the negative aspects and the legal aspects of the pharmaceutical campaigns on television will be discussed. The link that these advertisements have with Forensic Psychology is that these drugs are often used by Forensic Psychologists to control the behaviors of criminals that exist in the American criminal system. What kinds of effects do these pharmaceutical advertisements have on Forensic Psychologists? Is the effect of the pharmaceutical advertisements on Forensic Psychologists a positive one or a negative one? In the end are criminals being given bad pharmaceuticals that are not suitable to their exact treatment due to the prevalence of these pharmaceutical advertisements? These questions will be addressed in this research report.

Introduction

There are opposing forces to the battleground that takes place in the television advertising field concerning prescription drug advertisements. There are those people who feel that the pharmaceutical companies have a right to free speech and should be allowed to air as many commercials concerning prescription drugs as they want to. However, there is an opposing side that has a loud voice in this debate, many of them from the medical community and consumer interest community that believe that there should be sanctions on the frequency of drug advertisements on television and in other forms of media because of the effects these advertisements have on consumers.

My thesis statement for this essay is that I believe that pharmaceutical companies should have freedom of speech, however I do agree with the contingent of supporters in the camp that these advertisements should be relegated and monitored so that there are not so many of them on television. Perhaps an education program that accompanies such drug advertisements to the consumer would be beneficial would be beneficial in alleviating the negative effects that many people on the opposing camp for drug advertisements have regarding the advertisements.

There are three main ideas which support my thesis. The first point is to regulate drug ads. The second main idea is the opposing view to deregulating drug advertisements. The second point is stopping the speeding up of new drug approval with the federal government. As well this research report will answer the following questions in relation to Forensic Psychology: What kinds of effects do these pharmaceutical advertisements have on Forensic Psychologists? Is the effect of the pharmaceutical advertisements on Forensic Psychologists a positive one or a negative one? In the end are criminals being given bad pharmaceuticals that are not suitable to their exact treatment due to the prevalence of these pharmaceutical advertisements? These questions will be addressed in this research report.

Regulating Drug Ads

Untrue and deceptive advertising for drugs can injury consumers and the healthcare system, and previous research has established that physician-targeted drug advertisements may be misleading. However, there is a dearth of research comparing consumer-targeted drug advertising to evidence to evaluate whether misleading or false information is being presented in these ads.

This article by Faerber & Kreling (September 2013) shows that shocking result was the incidence of potentially deceptive claims that were true when taken literally, but upon further investigation may mislead consumers because of oversights, overstatements, opinions and meaningless associations.

Mangan (May 2016) states the majority of Americans want to ban TV drug ads. The majority of Americans would favor banning prescription drug advertisements on television, a new poll released Wednesday suggests. Before they were asked their opinions, respondents to the poll were told that some people believe such ads should be banned because of concerns that they can encourage patients to ask for costlier drugs that might be inappropriate for them, and because marketing costs boost the price of drugs. The poll comes six months after the American Medical Association, the nation’s largest physicians group, called for a ban on direct-to-consumer advertising of prescription drugs and medical devices. The STAT-Harvard poll found that only 7% of respondents said they had considered taking a prescription drug they had seen advertised on TV in the past 12 months.

Meyer (April 30, 2013) states This week the FDA announced their plan to conduct a new survey focusing on physicians and other healthcare professionals to understand the effect that direct-to-consumer (DTC) pharmaceutical advertising has on their prescribers’ behaviors; as well as gain their perspective on whether or not DTC drug marketing results in inappropriate requests for prescriptions or an overestimation by patients of their efficacy.It is already mentioned that most of the physicians agree with it could decrease direct-to-consumers pharmaceutical advertising encourages drug overutilization because over take medication, it will not help people’s health.

Science Daily(January 7, 2013) supports my opinion because of name-brand is not important to the patient. It just helps healthcare costs and the patient is waste money even generic brand medicine has the same efficacy. Taylor Tyler said as the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) prepares to conduct a new physician study on the perceived effectiveness of direct-to-consumer pharmaceutical advertising, another recent study indicates that a majority of doctors already believe the advertising practice should be scaled back.Stange (December 16, 2013) states that regulating drug advertisements is the best thing for the American consumer.

Opposing Drug Deregulation for Advertisements

Jacobson (May 9, 2012) says during the 2008 presidential campaign, Former United States President Barack Obama promised to "prevent drug companies from blocking generic drugs from consumers." He was referring to restriction alleged anti-competitive practices by branded drug producers in legal settlements they reach with generic drug makers. First, some background. Drug companies that develop new medications deemed safe and effective by the Food and Drug Administration are granted a period of market exclusivity, during which cheaper generic alternatives cannot be offered on the market. Once that exclusive period ends, generic copycat drugs may enter the market, and the price of the medications drops dramatically.This article does not support my opinion due to brand-name medication is high price even though the insurance company would not have covered some medication. Generic-name medication is low price and has same efficacy with brand-name, sometimes it is too heavy a burden to the consumer.

Tyler (June 3, 2013) said as the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) prepares to conduct a new physician study on the perceived effectiveness of direct-to-consumer pharmaceutical advertising, another recent study indicates that a majority of doctors already believe the advertising practice should be scaled back.This article does not support my opinion due to supports claim DTCPA could increase educated to a patient about treatments option and patients can discuss with their doctor.

Speeding Up Drug Approval Rates

Speeding up drug approval rates which some of the pharmaceutical companies are trying to do would be a great disadvantage to the pharmaceutical consumer in the United States. There have been many cases where there have been lawsuits against drug companies because of the negative side effects that pharmaceutical drugs can have and in some cases as well as many cases the bad side effects have even led to death. If the drug approval rate was rushed and/or sped up, this would increase the number of these instances taking place.

Transition to Link with Forensic Psychology

Influence of Pharmaceutical Advertisements on Forensic Psychology

According to Grisso Vincent (2005) pharmaceutical advertisements have a tremendous effect on Forensic Psychologists since they are open to the proliferation of these advertisements on television, on the radio and also online. Many Forensic Psychologists receive their ideas of what medications to use to treat criminals such as murderers through advertisements for pharmaceuticals on television. As Manuck (2000) notes the assessment tools to monitor the mental behavior of criminals that Forensic Psychologists must deal with needs to be widely approved by government officials and since most of the pharmaceuticals that are advertised on television, the radio and online are approved by the American government, Forensic Psychologists use these advertisements as a primary source to discover new medications that could help to treat adverse behavior in criminals that they deal with through the Criminal Justice system in America.

There are few people who disapprove of Forensic Psychologists use of pharmaceutical advertisements as a source to discover new pharmaceuticals to treat criminals. The true issue at play here is the cost to the American taxpayer.

According to Hora, Schma & Rosenthal (1998) there is a term they coin as Therapeutic Jurisprudence where pharmaceuticals, Forensic Psychologists and Criminals come into play. Through this interplay it is the taxpayers of the United States that hold the burden for Therapeutic Jurisprudence through the sometimes expensive pharmaceuticals that are also advertised through the media that are used by Forensic Psychologists to moderate the behavior of Criminals and in particular Career Criminals. As well, DeLisi & Gatling (2003) note that it is the taxpayers of America that pay the price to keep the behavior of Criminals and Career Criminals that Forensic Psychologists must deal with, manage and control and that the pharmaceutical advertising plays a role in upping the price of that tax burden on Americans.

Conclusion

The purpose of this paper is to discuss the on-going war on pharmaceutical drug advertisements and how this correlates with the field of Forensic Psychology. The existing pharmaceutical campaigns that exist in the media as well as how they affect the Forensic Psychology field are discussed. The discussion of the positive aspects, the negative aspects and the legal aspects of the pharmaceutical campaigns on television is discussed. The link that these advertisements have with Forensic Psychology is that these drugs are often used by Forensic Psychologists to control the behaviors of criminals that exist in the American criminal system. What kinds of effects do these pharmaceutical advertisements have on Forensic Psychologists? Is the effect of the pharmaceutical advertisements on Forensic Psychologists a positive one or a negative one? In the end are criminals being given bad pharmaceuticals that are not suitable to their exact treatment due to the prevalence of these pharmaceutical advertisements? These questions are addressed in this research report.

References

DeLisi, M., & Gatling, J. (2003). Who pays for a life of crime? An empirical assessment of the

assorted victimization costs posed by career criminals. Criminal Justice Studies, 16(4), 283-293.

Faerber, A. E. & Kreling, D. H. (September 2013). "Content Analysis of False and Misleading

Claims in Television Advertising for Prescription and Nonprescription Drugs,”Journal of Internal Medicine, Retrieved from:

Grisso, T., & Vincent, G. M. (2005). The empirical limits of forensic mental health assessment.

Law and Human Behavior, 29(1), 1.

Hora, P. F., Schma, W. G., & Rosenthal, J. T. (1998). Therapeutic jurisprudence and the drug

treatment court movement: Revolutionizing the criminal justice system's response to drug abuse and crime in America. Notre Dame L. Rev., 74, 439.

Jacobson, L. (March 9, 2012). "Prevent Drug Companies from Blocking Generic Drugs,”

Retrieved from:

Mangan, D. (May 2016)"Americans to Big Pharma: Cut out the TV Drug Ads."CNBC. CNBC,

12. Retrieved from:

Manuck, S. B. (2000). Effects of lovastatin on cognitive function and psychological well-being.

The American journal of medicine, 108(7), 538-546.

Meyer, R. (April 30, 2013)."Majority of Physicians Believe DTC Ads Should Be Cut Back,”

Retrieved from:

Muldoon, M. F., Barger, S. D., Ryan, C. M., Flory, J. D., Lehoczky, J. P., Matthews, K. A., &

Science Daily. (Jan. 7, 2013). "Many U.S. Physicians Often Fulfill Patient Requests for Brand-

Name Drugs Instead of Equivalent Generics,” Retrieved from:

Stange, K. C. (December 16, 2013). "Consumer Drug Advertising Should Be Banned,”

Retrieved from:

Tyler, T. (June 3, 2013). "Direct-to-Consumer Drug Ads Should Be Scaled Back, Doctors Say,”

Retrieved from: