Adam Beckstead

Drug Advertising
Biology 1090-033 (10:00 a.m.)
October 19, 2015

1. The major point of the Yes side to the direct to consumer advertising position was that it
provides patients the opportunity to have an open and honest dialogue with their doctor
regarding current and potential medical issues. The authors position was that by drug
manufacturers being permitted to provide information to patients regarding drug benefits
and risks they would be able to speak with their doctors with some information and able
to participate in choosing what drugs might be best for them.
2. The major point of the No side to the direct to consumer advertising position was that the
doctor is in the best position to determine what drugs is most viable for their patient.
Because a physician has accessed to his patients records, conditions, and lifestyle he is in
a better position to decide what drugs his patient should be taking given the totality of his
health record.
3. One interesting fact presented by the Yes side of the argument was that 43% of patients
who participated in a study of 9000 people were not receiving adequate therapy for major
depression. A second interesting fact presented by the Yes side of the argument was of
Americans over the age of 40 more than 17% are effected by congestive heart failure.
4. One interesting fact presented by the No side of the argument was that physicians
reported that 41% of their patients were confused about a drugs effectiveness based upon
advertisements they had seen. A second interesting fact was that 35% of primary care
physicians and specialists felt some pressure to prescribe drugs that there patients
requested.

5. One interesting opinion presented by the Yes side of the argument was that through
advertising patients are able to suggest conditions they may suffer from to their
physicians based upon information presented through advertisements. A second opinion
presented by the Yes argument was that patients are comforted to know that others
suffered from the same problems that they do and it is easier for them to discuss with
their doctor when they do not feel that they are labeled by their disease.
6. One opinion used by the No side of the argument was that people may not subscribe to a
healthy lifestyle they think that drugs are an easy answer to the problems. A second
opinion was that direct to consumer advertisements do not really contain all the risk and
benefit analysis of patient would need.
7. In my opinion and misleading statement utilized by the Yes side the argument was that
drug advertisements get patients talking to their doctors about conditions that may have
been undiagnosed, and treated or undertreated. I think this is misleading because a doctor
is trained to look at a patients symptoms in conjunction with other factors to determine
what a patient is suffering from. Also I think advertisements do not get a complete picture
or in a limited time they are aired can possibly describe an illness in enough detail that a
patient can diagnose himself.
8. A misleading statement on the No side of the argument is that patients expect simple
answers to their medical questions. I dont believe that is true. I think that most patients
suffering from an illness want as much information as possible in as much detail as a
doctor can get them. Most people are very interested in how I want to know all the
benefits and risks associated with drugs.
9. Personally I feel the most correct argument is that drug companies should be allowed to
direct advertise to patients. A patient has the right to know as much as possible about
drugs that are available to them and what the risks and benefits from taking them are. A

drug company is in the best position to provide that information to physicians who
prescribed medications and the patients who are taking them. Drugs are much like any
other item and a company should be permitted to advertise what they have to sell.
10. Paul Antony who presented the Yes argument relied upon the most data in presenting his
side. He cited many different studies and polls by schools and from health magazines. He
also relied upon data from actual patients and data from doctors in support of his position.
11. I believe that Kessler and Levy may be biased in their opinion because they do not want a
drug company interfering with their (a doctors) ability to prescribe and treat their
patients. It is clear that they think they are in the best position to determine what a patient
is suffering from and what the best course of medication should be.