How can you argue with ads for a drug attacking America's leading killer?
Easy - when you base the argument on facts and evidence rather than emotion and fear-mongering.
Canadian drug policy analyst Alan Cassels writes about disease-mongering in ads for cholesterol-lowering drugs such as Pfizer's Lipitor, the #1 selling prescription drug. He writes: "What most people won’t learn from such ads is that when scientists have done meta-analyses (a study of a collection of studies) of the largest statin drug trials, they inevitably find that the drugs show no difference in mortality, when compared against placebo. There may be some changes in heart attack rates, but no changes in overall deaths, which is what the ads are all implying. We don’ t call this disease avoidance, we call it disease substitution. The drug may prevent a heart attack death but in the process will cause other kinds of deaths, a sort of zero sum gain that is the equivalent of taking an expensive placebo."
Cassels writes about one Pfizer Lipitor ad that shows the tagged toe of a corpse. “What would you rather have, a cholesterol test or a final exam?” asks the headline. Cassels says "The key message is that getting a cholesterol check and then, probably taking drugs to alter your cholesterol, will prevent a premature death. Even, if you are otherwise healthy."
Posted by schwitz at November 9, 2006 08:19 AM | TrackBack