Blog

Good basic article on drug advertising in LA Times

On Feb 6, David Lazarus, writer of “Consumer Confidential” for the Los Angeles Times, wrote an article on drug advertising, “Ads spur urge for drugs“. The article didn’t break any new ground in its analysis of how drug ads spur people to ask for drugs they may not need, but was a good overview of the issue.

Lazarus focused on a new Direct-to-Consumer ad campaign for Provigil, which originally was approved by the FDA to treat narcolepsy and is now also approved to treat “excessive sleepiness associated with obstructive sleep apnea.” The ads claim that Provigil can “fight the fog.”

Lazarus reports this telling exchange:

Jenifer Antonacci, a Cephalon spokeswoman, said the new DTC campaign is merely intended to raise awareness about excessive sleepiness.

“We’ve decided to take a leadership role in this area,” she said. “Our goal is to help educate consumers about excessive sleepiness and start a dialogue between patients and their physicians.”

While Provigil is being marketed as a remedy for fatigue resulting from sleep apnea, it’s not hard to imagine on-the-go people in today’s 24/7 world seeing the drug as a nifty way to cram a few more hours of wakeful activity into already crowded days.

Why settle for a venti latte at Starbucks when you can get the same kick (and possibly more) from a little pill?

Antonacci described a potential Provigil user as someone who repeatedly finds himself nodding off on the couch while watching TV at night.

“That’s me!” I responded.

“Maybe you have sleep apnea,” Antonacci observed.

So don’t be surprised if a lot of consumers who now ask their doctors about Provigil don’t have obstructive sleep apnea, shift work sleep disorder or narcolepsy, the only three conditions for which using Provigil to treat “excessive sleepiness” is approved. And don’t be surprised if those doctors write a prescription for those patients anyway:

Some doctors I’ve spoken with say they’ll suggest generic equivalents or alternative approaches. But if patients are determined to try a name-brand drug they’ve seen pushed on TV or in the paper, it’s often not worth the trouble trying to talk them out of it.

And studies bear this out. When patients ask their doctors for drugs they’ve seen on TV, doctors will prescribe them in much higher numbers than if the patients didn’t ask for an advertised drug by name. See, for instance, a study published in 2005 in the Journal of the American Medical Association: Influence of Patients’ Requests for Direct-to-Consumer Advertised Antidepressants

It strikes me as highly ironic that two very big markets for prescription drugs, and that feature lots of ads, are (1) drugs to help you fall asleep (Ambien, Ambien CR, Lunesta, Rozerem) and (2) drugs to help you stay awake (Provigil). It suggests that perhaps the problem is not a medical one, but a social one — we as a society just don’t get enough sleep. And no amount of pills will solve that. No matter what drug ads claim.

Or, as Lazarus put it:

I asked Antonacci what else could cause excessive sleepiness.

“The No. 1 cause of excessive sleepiness is not getting enough sleep,” she replied.

I’m no doctor, but the remedy for that seems simple enough.

Related posts

  • No Related Post
Donate to PAL (via PayPal)Take Action: Get Involved

2 Responses to “Good basic article on drug advertising in LA Times”

  1. Dan Says:

    In the United States, two of the top classes of medications are insomnia meds and anti-depressants, so this fact may be an accurate illustration of the state of our society and the lack of ability to cope of many, which is why they seek such psychoactive drugs to provide relief instantly instead of exploring other options to eliminate such conditions.

  2. Sheila Says:

    I have been diagnosed with MS, and one of the symtoms of MS is Fatigue, which can bring on the onset of a relapse causing inflammation which can damamge the nerves throughout all areas in the body, this is why MS is so painful and devastating. I was fatigued 24/7 with at least 5 relapses a year, involving several doses of interveinus steriods due to severe inflammation that permantely damaged my optical nerve along with painful muscle weekness. Painkillers were all I could use, and that still did not stop the pain or the problem from continuing. I was working 40 hours a week until I began feeling ill and fatigued, then I could only work at the most 12 yours a week.

    My Doctor perscribed Provigil, I immediatelly noticed an improvment in my daily activities, I have gone a whole year with no relapses MS. I am 40 years old, and have two young children, I have recently finished my degree, working with young children. I have been using Provigil since 2006, and this drug has been a life safer for me, I finally have my life back again.

    I have just learned my insurance will no longer cover this perscription because of the price increase, this was very discouraging to my husband and I. My husband worries alot about my health and is scared of seeing my health go down hill again.

    I hope a generic is brought out, or insurance companies reconsider covering this life saving drug. After reading this sight I was amazed to hear how so many others benifited from this drug as well, and how little help the company that manufactures their own drug, only seems to care about the profit in their wallets verses the quality of lives provigil has helped. My children and the children I teach will probably feel the affects of their decision, but will not profit as well as they will, and that makes me very sad.

Leave a Reply