Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

BumRushDaShow

(142,935 posts)
Thu Nov 14, 2024, 12:20 PM Nov 14

New FDA rules for TV drug ads: Simpler language and no distractions

Source: AP

Updated 10:09 AM EST, November 14, 2024


WASHINGTON (AP) — Those ever-present TV drug ads showing patients hiking, biking or enjoying a day at the beach could soon have a different look: New rules require drugmakers to be clearer and more direct when explaining their medications’ risks and side effects.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration spent more than 15 years crafting the guidelines, which are designed to do away with industry practices that downplay or distract viewers from risk information.

Many companies have already adopted the rules, which become binding Nov. 20. But while regulators were drafting them, a new trend emerged: thousands of pharma influencers pushing drugs online with little oversight. A new bill in Congress would compel the FDA to more aggressively police such promotions on social media platforms.

“Some people become very attached to social media influencers and ascribe to them credibility that, in some cases, they don’t deserve,” said Tony Cox, professor emeritus of marketing at Indiana University. Still, TV remains the industry’s primary advertising format, with over $4 billion spent in the past year, led by blockbuster drugs like weight-loss treatment Wegovy, according to ispot.tv, which tracks ads.

Read more: https://apnews.com/article/drug-ads-fda-risks-side-effects-influencers-80bbe076f4ed743ebde3923dd28be004



Link to Federal Register FINAL RULE - Direct-to-Consumer Prescription Drug Advertisements: Presentation of the Major Statement in a Clear, Conspicuous, and Neutral Manner in Advertisements in Television and Radio Format

Link to GUIDELINES (PDF) - https://www.fda.gov/media/175074/download
17 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

CousinIT

(10,264 posts)
3. I remember when they could not advertise directly to consumers AT ALL.
Thu Nov 14, 2024, 12:28 PM
Nov 14

We should go back to that. When we pay $$$$$$$$$ for an Rx drug that costs $$ elsewhere, we're paying for these fucking ads.

CrispyQ

(38,346 posts)
4. A number of them are like mini-movies with several actors & different settings.
Thu Nov 14, 2024, 12:31 PM
Nov 14

And sometimes you still don't know what the drug is for by the end. How much does it cost to produce something like that? And to air it, since they're so long.

SCantiGOP

(14,275 posts)
11. My doctor toad me about a male patient
Thu Nov 14, 2024, 01:54 PM
Nov 14

Who asked for a drug based on what the ad said it treated and its results.
The doctor said it was hard to keep a straight face when he explained that it was a drug to treat menopause symptoms.

surfered

(3,331 posts)
5. Why are their ads anyway? Shouldn't your doctor select your medication?
Thu Nov 14, 2024, 12:35 PM
Nov 14

You can’t get it without a prescription anyway. FYI: There are no pharmaceutical ads on European TV

ck4829

(36,005 posts)
6. Ask your doctor if X is right for you
Thu Nov 14, 2024, 12:54 PM
Nov 14

What we really need is "Ask your doctor if universal healthcare is right for you"

BumRushDaShow

(142,935 posts)
7. "Why are their ads anyway? Shouldn't your doctor select your medication?"
Thu Nov 14, 2024, 01:07 PM
Nov 14

Because over 60 years ago, Congress told FDA to do it (rather than have the FTC do it like they do other TV advertising) - S. 1552 (87th): An Act to protect the public health by amending the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to assure the safety, effectiveness, and reliability of drugs, authorize standardization of drug names, and clarify and ...... strengthen existing inspection authority; and for other purposes

At the time, most of that was done as "labeling via inserts" or through medical publications, but not really to TV, so it wasn't necessarily a big deal until obviously TV became a huge "thing". You also had many consumers desire this because they felt their doctors were operating in some kind of "black box" without any impetus to explain the whats and whys of the drugs they were prescribing. I know I grew up with a PDR (Physician's Desk Reference) in my household!



Congress has tried to amend those amendments to the FD&C Act for years but none have been able to get through and come to fruition.

BumRushDaShow

(142,935 posts)
16. Well I think in the "modern" broadcast era, probably
Thu Nov 14, 2024, 05:04 PM
Nov 14

along with big pharma considering it "First Amendment". This function really should be under the FTC because they have enforcement mechanisms for deceptive advertising that FDA really doesn't (other than maybe claiming "misbranding" ).

PSPS

(14,157 posts)
12. Such advertising used to be illegal. Then saint ronnie came to town and the downward spiral began.
Thu Nov 14, 2024, 02:27 PM
Nov 14

These ads are sardonically funny. An example is the happy smiling cartoon bee flying around being friendly with people while the voice in the background is rapidly saying how the drug will give you irreversible brain damage and/or just kill you.

In the "good old days," TV ads like this were forbidden and, even in print, the entire package insert had to be printed with the ad, making it impractical to run print ads in mainstream print media.

When saint ronnie assumed power, due solely to his secret back-door dealings with the iranians to keep the hostages until after his election (and no republican has legitimately won the white house since,) the federal government has been systematically dismantled or de-fanged. We're now a country where "freedom" means "freedom to do anything" when, instead, it should be "freedom from" things like religion, guns, school massacres, dangerous or ineffective drugs and "supplements," etc.

cynical_idealist

(452 posts)
13. Side effects may include rigor mortis and decomposition
Thu Nov 14, 2024, 02:47 PM
Nov 14

I remember seeing one ad where the text disclaimers were scrolling around
different shapes on the screen so you couldn't read without pausing.

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»New FDA rules for TV drug...