Direct-to-Consumer (DTC) pharmaceutical ads may be heavily restricted due to a policy by President Donald Trump. The restrictions he and United States Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr. wish to instate would force pharmaceutical ads to list every possible side effect of a drug, in an effort to better inform viewers of the risks of a drug. In earlier years, when this was how DTC ads were previously restricted, companies disliked this and fought against it, which may happen now.
Currently, prescription drug ads need to list the most serious side effects that a drug has and have a way for people to go somewhere else to learn more about the complete list of side effects. DTC advertising was made possible in 1997, when the FDA relaxed its restrictions on drug promotion. Although the current rules do have some restrictions, the previous rules were much stricter and required a commercial to state every possible side effect, which could take up all the time in the ad. If a commercial did not comply with these rules, they had to avoid mentioning what the drug was supposed to do in the first place, or the FDA could take down the ad.
The main reason for bringing back these restrictions, as stated by Kennedy on September 9th, is that “Pharmaceutical ads hooked this country on prescription drugs… Only radical transparency will break the cycle of overmedicalization that drives America’s chronic disease epidemic.” His thinking is that people see these commercials and believe they need these drugs and even if the advertised medicine could help them, they use more than needed and abuse the medication due to not knowing all the side effects and risks (such as addiction).
Although RFK Jr. believes these commercials are not informing people enough and therefore should be stopped, many people, such as Lisa Miller, a Marketing Manager currently working under contract at Novartis, believe that these commercials are actually helping to inform people.
According to Miller, in an interview about this topic, she said, “DTC to me means medical awareness,” explaining that DTC ads can teach and inform viewers about a disease and treatment options. She says “the more you know, the earlier the education, the earlier the intervention, the earlier the intervention, the better the outcome.”
Her words can be backed up with a survey conducted by Swoop, which focused on over nine hundred members of MyHealthTeam communities, the most prominent communities being those with HIV, MASH, Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis, heart disease, diabetes, and more. According to 67% of the people surveyed, after seeing an ad for a treatment, they took action, with 21% to 32% saying they spoke to a doctor about treatment options, medications, a diagnosis, or symptoms (Chronic disease treatment ads have sparked action in two-thirds of patients: survey: Fierce Pharma).
As people see these commercials and speak to their doctor about medications and diseases, they’re more likely to try to or get a prescription drug, which is a main reason the current administration wants to restrict commercials more, and why companies want to keep creating these advertisements. A wide variety of people go through the process of creating pharmaceutical commercials, such as marketers, medical writers, lawyers, graphic designers, musicians, directors, regulatory workers, etc, who all work together to make sure a commercial is good to be put out, because if the commercial does well, they’ll get more sales and recognition for their drugs and the company.
If these commercials can no longer be made due to the restrictions the administration wants to instate, then a lot of people could lose their jobs. If the change goes through, there’s a good chance companies might be making fewer DTC ads, and if fewer ads are being made or less creativity and parts needed for the ads, then fewer people will be needed. That would mean that new job opportunities could open up, as companies might have more money to use on other jobs that are no longer being spent on commercials. Miller explained that instead of many people just losing their jobs, “jobs will be balancing differently,” as commercials could still be made, they might just need new people who would be a better fit when complying with new restrictions.
When these restrictions were in place, companies, of course disliked them, and fought back for looser restrictions, which might happen now. If the policy does or doesn’t go through, a lot of people will be thinking about the restrictions the administration wants to bring back, and whether they agree with the policy or not, just the possibility of this being instated could greatly change pharmaceutical commercials, for the better or worse.
