Clarifying the message
Our View
Daily Vidette Opinions Council
Issue date: 2/27/08 Section: Viewpoint
Pens have their messages scrawled colorfully across their plastic encasing. The ads are plastered on bulletin boards, coffee mugs and sometimes, they even sponsor a major sporting events.
It seems no matter where you go, there is no way to avoid the enthusiastic promotion of prescription drugs. From getting advice on your arthritic knee from a promotional clipboard, to discovering a cure for your restless legs between your favorite shows, the relentless advertising for prescription drugs is everywhere.
Perhaps one of the more widespread campaigns comes in the form of a commercial, for Pfizer's Lipitor.
Dr. Robert Jarvik, the inventor of the artificial heart, is the celebrity charged with endorsing the drug and recommending its use.
There is one problem, however.
Jarvik, genius as the artificial heart may be, is not a practicing physician.
In fact, he describes himself as a "medical scientist" who does not practice clinical medicine or treat individual patients.
The discovery of this came as a result of a House committee's investigation of celebrity endorsements of prescription drugs.
Pfizer quickly issued a statement and pulled the ad, saying "The way in which we portrayed Dr. Jarvik in these ads has, unfortunately, led to misimpressions and distractions from our primary goal of encouraging patient and physician dialogue on the leading cause of death in the world - cardiovascular disease."
While it is easy to quickly condemn drug companies, facts are different in this case.
Getting beyond the expected consumer blaming language of the statement, there is another party more responsible for trusting the status of celebrity for medical advice.
That party is ourselves.
When evaluating what we will and will not put into our bodies, it is irresponsible to take the word of celebrities or actors as fact. After all, the intricacies of complicated medication could not be explained by the most experienced doctor in the 30 second spot.
What should happen, however, is more of a dialogue with real health care professionals about medication.
In this circumstance, we must be willing to do slightly more research and thinking, rather than blatantly accepting the claims of a glowing television character, simply because the word "doctor" precedes their name.
So, while Pfizer could have been clearer on the qualifications of Jarvik, their prerogative should be clear. Create interest in a product, and subsequently sell it to a public. It isn't like consumers can buy the prescription meds without consulting a health care professional anyway.
Perhaps Congress should instead investigate over-the-counter medications endorsed by celebrities.
It seems no matter where you go, there is no way to avoid the enthusiastic promotion of prescription drugs. From getting advice on your arthritic knee from a promotional clipboard, to discovering a cure for your restless legs between your favorite shows, the relentless advertising for prescription drugs is everywhere.
Perhaps one of the more widespread campaigns comes in the form of a commercial, for Pfizer's Lipitor.
Dr. Robert Jarvik, the inventor of the artificial heart, is the celebrity charged with endorsing the drug and recommending its use.
There is one problem, however.
Jarvik, genius as the artificial heart may be, is not a practicing physician.
In fact, he describes himself as a "medical scientist" who does not practice clinical medicine or treat individual patients.
The discovery of this came as a result of a House committee's investigation of celebrity endorsements of prescription drugs.
Pfizer quickly issued a statement and pulled the ad, saying "The way in which we portrayed Dr. Jarvik in these ads has, unfortunately, led to misimpressions and distractions from our primary goal of encouraging patient and physician dialogue on the leading cause of death in the world - cardiovascular disease."
While it is easy to quickly condemn drug companies, facts are different in this case.
Getting beyond the expected consumer blaming language of the statement, there is another party more responsible for trusting the status of celebrity for medical advice.
That party is ourselves.
When evaluating what we will and will not put into our bodies, it is irresponsible to take the word of celebrities or actors as fact. After all, the intricacies of complicated medication could not be explained by the most experienced doctor in the 30 second spot.
What should happen, however, is more of a dialogue with real health care professionals about medication.
In this circumstance, we must be willing to do slightly more research and thinking, rather than blatantly accepting the claims of a glowing television character, simply because the word "doctor" precedes their name.
So, while Pfizer could have been clearer on the qualifications of Jarvik, their prerogative should be clear. Create interest in a product, and subsequently sell it to a public. It isn't like consumers can buy the prescription meds without consulting a health care professional anyway.
Perhaps Congress should instead investigate over-the-counter medications endorsed by celebrities.
Be the first to comment on this story