Drug ads should tell you the cost

| 2 Comments

A South Carolina physician states in a letter to the editor in this week's BMJ:
2003-10-13-lamisil.jpg
"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.


2 Comments

I totally agree! I think it is irresponsible to advertise drugs this way. Especially on the internet.

I 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.

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by Gary Schwitzer published on April 12, 2008 11:28 AM.

WSJ Health Blog Flogs Vytorin Again was the previous entry in this blog.

The myth of "the best health care in the world" is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.

Archives

Pages

Wikio - Top of the Blogs - Health

Add to Technorati Favorites