Claim
Is it permissible for organizations in the pharmaceutical industry to engage in aggressive product promotion using nonfactual fictional information to woe clients at the expense of their health?
Explanation of the claim
In the recent years, there has been stiff market and product competition in the pharmaceutical consumer goods; the increase in the number of the products in the market due to increased technological advancement which has made production easy. Easy availability and affordability of technology to manufacture pharmaceutical products in the 21st century has made it easy for new producers to enter the market which has increased the production of substitute pharmaceutical products. Substitutes are goods that can be used for the same purposes; increase in substitutes has increased competition for markets and consumers which has led to aggressive competition amongst the producers in the bid of gaining the largest market share (Ebeling, Mary 2008).
Aggressive advertisement and publicity of goods has led to insincere promotion that is aimed at depicting the strength or quality of a certain pharmaceutical product over the other. Pharmaceutical products are used mainly for health applications which can make a deceiving advertisement very lethal to the consumers. It is a question of the permissibility of drug commercials that provide deceiving information about the drugs they purport to sell. Corrupt drug companies are using deceptive Ads to market their products. In the United States of America which is one of the two countries that allow Big Pharma to advertise directly to the consumers resulting to consumer deception and high misuse of drugs due to self-prescription. In most television Ads and print media advertisements they use cheerful and glossy people who might never even have used the drugs they advertise to promote their products (Kantha, Ranjan Kumar 35).
For instance, the latest Ad from the Merck Company in which they feature Dorothy Hamill an Olympic skating champion to advertise their arthritis drug Vioxx is an example of a deceptive advertisement. Vioxx has been associated with life-threatening side effects like heart attacks which could affect the users. So far food and drug administration research have proved that the drug has been responsible for more than 27,000 cases of heart attacks. The drug was allowed on the market long enough for the company to make billions of money only at the cost of innocent drug consumers. Direct to consumer Ads have been the obvious thing in most American and New Zealand mass media. Such advertisements urge the consumers to request specific drug prescriptions provocatively. In 2009 alone American pharmaceutical firms spent 4.5 billion dollars in advertisement alone. Most direct to consumer advertisements gives the audience the illusion that they can be their doctor by making the viewer’s believe that they can prescribe the drug for themselves (Rosen, David 2011).
Reasons for the claim
i) The need to preserve the safety of drug consumers.
It is important to note that despite the thriving business of selling drugs; no one is happy to use drugs or to be sick in that case. It is morally wrong to exploit sick people by selling drugs and health products that do not meet the consumer expectations. Exaggerated or deceiving drug advertisements and commercials aired in media houses can negatively affect consumers by making them believe in their effective whereas they result in worse side effects ailments than even the primary ailment. It is, therefore, necessary to limit and regulate the use of direct to consumer drug advertisements with an aim of preserving the health of the consumers. In the absence of these regulations, consumers will continue being corrupted by drug companies which advocate for self-prescription in their advertisements hence endangering their lives by failing to consult a physician (Davis, Joel 350).
Ii) There is the need to make drug manufacturers responsible for related drug side effects.
Drug manufacturers and companies are making dirty money through coercive advertisements at the expense of the poor drug consumers who are desperately in need to feel better. Most drug commercials are aimed at increasing the sales for the drug companies and not necessarily to mind the consumer welfare. This makes the direct to consumer advertisements morally wrong and not an ethical business practice. The biggest benefactor in such a relationship is the drug companies who only care to make profits by selling more drugs (Davis, Joel 347).
Iii) Growing number of direct to consumer drug advertisements.
The increasing number of direct to consumer drug commercials is reducing the credibility of our trusted physician with good practice and referrals than the on shop drugs that consumers are prescribing for themselves not aware of the consequences. The growing number of commercials means that the drug companies are cashing more as more consumers get deceived of their health and wellbeing. The high the deception the higher the demand for more drugs to suppress the side effects of the other drug. This is ethically not acceptable and is resulting in a lot of deaths and suffering of consumers who have resulted in neglecting of the noble role of the physicians. Exaggerated consumer goods like drugs could directly affect the consumers if not well used.
iv) The role of physicians cannot be replaced in the bid to maintain quality healthcare outcomes.
The role of physicians cannot be replaced with mere commercials which are exaggerative and not sensitive to the plight of the drug consumers. Most drug consumers have developed the habit of buying over the counter drugs which is much convenient and inexpensive compared to the cost of enlisting the services of a qualified physician. Despite the convenience of over the counter drugs, they could result in the wrong dosage or treat a disease with the wrong medicine which could just be suppressed only to reoccur. Physicians play a great role in the health care industry. Physicians provide moral guidance to the drug consumers to have quality health care outcomes.
V) The leniency of the government in providing regulation in the advertisement of consumer goods such as drugs.
The government makes a lot of revenue in the taxation of drug companies and advertisement of drugs. This has made the government regulatory agencies very lenient on the regulation of drug commercials. This has led to the increase in drug commercials deception of as long as the company owners have their pockets full of dirty money in the expense of the same people advertisement regulatory bodies should be protecting. There is a need to streamline the government regulatory bodies to increase their transparency and strictness on what is supposed to be hired. There is a need to include advisory information on drug advertisement so that drug consumers cannot mistake the commercials with physician advice they should be seeking (Davis, Joel 346).
Reasons against claim
i) Drug commercials are a source of information for potential patients and consumers.
Drug commercials act as a source of information on the possible variety of drugs that are on disposal for the patients. The information allows the patients to compare and contrast on the number of avenues and drugs they can use for their cases to improve convenience. This information is readily available and can reach a high number of people if they are directly marketed through commercials to millions of people watching television or reading print media.
ii) Drug commercial improves the safe practice of drug administration.
Drug commercials provide more information about drugs and their capabilities to the consumers. This educative education makes them aware of possible solutions to their problems and the right subscription. What these commercials fail to tell the audience and drug consumers is the importance of seeking physicians help before the admission of these drugs. Taking of drugs that are not well prescribed by physicians could have adverse effects on the health of the drug consumers.
Iii) Drug commercials increase the convenience of getting drugs from drug stores and chemists.
Drugs commercials are said to increase the convenience of getting the necessary drugs for some ailments that affect people. Inconvenience is a problem caused by lack of enough information regarding the places that people can get access to the drugs they would like. Paid drug commercials in different public media increase the awareness of the drugs and the most convenient place to have them; the advent of online drug stores has even made it more convenient for the consumers.
iv) Drug commercials save the consumers the cost of seeking the physician help which is sometimes costly.
Seeking physicians help is sometimes costly and tedious due to the distance one has to travel and stay in long queues in local hospitals which luck enough personnel. This forces most patients to rely on commercials for a quick fix on the problems they have from drug commercials that provide relevant information aimed at specific problems.
Decision
The reasons for the claim are stronger than the reasons against the claim; drug commercials are a major problem in ensuring quality healthcare outcomes and quality health care for the people in America and other parts of the world. Increased commercialized promotion on drugs has led to the degradation of the health care system as well as the primary trust in physicians whom for centuries have been held accountable for the people health needs. The drug commercials emphasize self-prescription of drugs which is very dangerous to the health of the people. There is need for strict regulation to control the drug commercials which are directed to increase the amount of profit for the drug companies at the expense of the people’s health (Kantha, Ranjan Kumar 35).
Rebuttals
i) The information provided by commercials is not exhaustive; most commercials only tell the patients what they want them to know and fail to reveal the information that could be of real help in helping the patient make the decision.
ii) Drug commercials do not increase the safety of the use of drugs but only makes the situation worse. The only people who stand to benefit through drug commercials are the drug companies and the government through collection of revenue.
iii) The convenience of getting the drugs is not enough to ensure safety in drug administration, but the ability to get the right drug and advice from a physician is what matters most in ensuring the health of a consumer. Advice from the physician would be better and will improve the quality of the health outcomes, unlike self-prescription.
iv) Drug commercials save the cost of going to the physicians for health analysis and drug prescription but increase the chances of getting ailments associated with the drugs in the commercials that are not mentioned. Drug commercials save the drug consumers money only to spend more money on ailments that result from poor drug prescription all these activities makes the drug companies richer at the expense of the lives lost through wrong drug prescriptions.
Work cited
Ebeling, Mary. Beyond advertising: The pharmaceutical industry`s Hidden marketing tactics. PR Watch. February 21, 2008. Web
http://www.prwatch.org/news/2008/02/7026/beyond-advertising-pharmaceutical-industrys-hidden-marketing-tactics
Davis, Joel J. "Riskier than we think? The relationship between risk statement completeness and perceptions of direct to consumer advertised prescription drugs." Journal of health communication 5.4 (2000): 340-369.
Kantha, Ranjan Kumar. "Deception: a threat to consumerism." International Journal of Management, IT and Engineering 5.3 (2015): 35.
Rosen, David, How does the drug industry get away with broadcasting those deceptive Ads? Alternet. March 12, 2011. Web
http://www.alternet.org/story/149909/how_does_the_drug_industry_get_away_with_broadcastin g_those_deceptive_ads
