Advertising For Prescription Drugs: Dangerous To Your Health?

FAYETTEVILLE, Ark. — While working on her master’s in journalism at the University of Arkansas, Juhee Cho decided to investigate whether television ads for prescription drugs contained enough information to help consumers make informed choices. After analyzing ads for the 11 most heavily advertised drugs between 1999 and 2000, she concluded that the ads were neither balanced nor informative, a finding that suggests the FDA should more closely monitor these ads to safeguard public health.

She will present her findings this August in Kansas City during the convention of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, the national organization for university faculty in journalism and mass communication.

Cho found that prescription drug ads appeared to work, since sales of the 50 most heavily advertised drugs increased 32% between 1999 and 2000. Moreover, total expenditures for advertising increased twenty-fold during the 1990’s, growing from $25 million in 1992 to almost $1.9 billion in 1999.

"Drug sales increased as advertising increased," said Cho. "Twenty two of the top 50 most heavily advertised drugs in 2000 were also on the list of the 50 best-selling drugs that year. Among the most notable drugs on both lists are Prilosec, Lipitor, Prevacid, Vioxx, Paxil, Prozac, Claritin, Zocor, Pravachol, Celebrex, and Viagra."

Such advertising influences how consumers regard prescription drugs. In a 2000 survey reported in the Journal of Health Communication, 43% of the respondents believed that only completely safe drugs could be advertised on television, radio, and magazines.

"The truth is, further research revealed that these advertisements leave out important safety information and exaggerate the product’s benefits, as noted by frequent FDA letters documenting objections to such ads. Most of these advertisements do not have educational value and do not mention costs," said Cho.

Such advertising can lead consumers to ask their doctors for drugs they don’t really need. Cho discovered that while the five most advertised and purchased drugs in 2001 were for depression, ulcers, high cholesterol, osteoarthritis, and non-viral infections, the five most common health problems of Americans were heart disease, malignant neoplasms, diabetes, chronic low respiratory disease, and strokes, or cerebrovascular diseases.

"Clearly, the advertising is not offering information on the most common conditions from which Americans suffer. One possible explanation is that pharmaceutical companies make large profits on these drugs," said Cho.

She believes that these TV ads should either be banned, or advertisers should be required to include more information, especially on side effects. "The FDA should be much more aggressive in setting and enforcing guidelines for such ads, to protect and inform the public more effectively about the risks and benefits of drugs," Cho maintains.

She wrote the paper while enrolled in Dr. Jan LeBlanc Wicks’ class on issues in advertising and public relations. "I felt she did an excellent job and encouraged her to enter the graduate student paper competition," said Wicks, an associate professor of journalism in the J. William Fulbright College of Arts and Sciences. Papers are submitted by graduate and undergraduate students throughout the world who are seeking a chance to present their work to their peers.

Cho, who came to the U of A from Kwangju, South Korea in fall 1999 as a Fulbright International Exchange student, recently won a $6,000 International Peace Scholarship for graduate study. After earning her bachelor’s degree in English in 2002, she decided to study journalism.

"I was always interested in media and society, but I didn’t have a chance to study it before I came here," Cho said. "I can say, it changed my whole life. I really like the research that I’ve done in the journalism department, even if it’s hard as a foreigner to study journalism. I spend a lot of time reading and writing and rewriting."