The researchers, led by Dr. Steven Woloshin of Dartmouth Medical School in Hanover, New Hampshire, studied ads in 70 issues of 10 leading US consumer magazines. They found that 87% of the ads chose "vague, qualitative terms" such as "proven relief" to describe the drug's benefits instead of research evidence.
"This strategy," Woloshin says, "probably leaves many readers with the perception that the drug's benefit is large and that everyone who uses the drug will enjoy the benefit."
The authors go on to say that there is also a danger that the ads "medicalize" minor, run-of-the-mill problems. "A runny nose all of a sudden becomes allergic rhinitis."
The Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, a drug industry trade group, says that DTC ads help educate the public about diseases and treatments they might otherwise be unaware of.
Woloshin disagrees, especially since his team found few hard facts in the ads they studied. Indeed, bold print lines like "Is it just forgetfulnessSSor Alzheimer's disease?" are more likely to increase reader's anxiety rather than their awareness.
While the FDA does require drug manufacturers to list drug's side effects in their advertisements, Woloshin suggests that the FDA also require them to list research data on benefits and side effects in easy-to-read information boxes similar to nutrition labels on food.
In 1999, drug companies spent $1.8 Billion dollars on direct-to-consumer ads for prescription drugs.
