April 12, 2008
Drug ads should tell you the cost
A South Carolina physician states in a letter to the editor in this week's BMJ:
"Practising in the United States, I am well acquainted with direct to consumer advertising of prescription drugs. I suggest (and have suggested in the past to the Food and Drug Administration) that if such advertising is allowed, it should be mandatory for the manufacturer to state the typical cost of a course of treatment with the drug. My own experience of the $600 (£300; {euro}385) treatment for onychomycosis was that this information could save a great deal of time in explaining to the patient why the drug is not covered by their insurance. It could also prevent a whole unnecessary discussion in the first place as patients quite readily recognise that the cost is out of proportion to their problem."
Onychomycosis is toenail fungus. You know the ads.
I totally agree! I think it is irresponsible to advertise drugs this way. Especially on the internet.
Posted by: Aoleon at April 13, 2008 07:53 AMI had a nasty toenail fungus from a locker room incident while playing highschool football. Although the fungus went away, it took a year and hundreds of dollars. I agree with the idea above.
Posted by: Israel at April 23, 2008 05:56 AMMy policy on comments
I'm adopting the policy of a blog I admire: “Comments are great;
obnoxious comments get deleted. Deal.” I also won’t post profanity, product pitches, or anything from anyone
who doesn’t list what appears to be an actual e-mail address.