E-DRUG: Public information as a marketing tool - promotion of diseases and medicines
--------------------------------------------------------------
[Healthy Scepticism Netherlands have published a report that describes ways in which pharmaceutical companies provide the public with information about diseases and conditions. It provides an overview of the various methods used, and the impact that public information campaigns can have. The aim of this report is to demonstrate how companies use public information campaigns about diseases and conditions as tools to market their medicines. Thanks to Teresa Alves for spotting. WB]
http://www.gezondescepsis.nl/images/stories/downloads/rap_gs_public_information_20100929_s.pdf
Summary:
This report describes ways in which pharmaceutical companies provide
the public with information about diseases and conditions. It provides an
overview of the various methods used, and the impact that public
information campaigns can have. The aim of this report is to demonstrate
how companies use public information campaigns about diseases and
conditions as tools to market their medicines. In the research, we have
carried out three case studies to demonstrate how various methods are
applied and the parties are involved.
Symptom advertising
Pharmaceutical companies use various methods to communicate with the
public about diseases, conditions and medicines. They conduct public
information campaigns that focus on the symptoms of a disease or
condition, described as 'symptom advertising'. In international literature,
this is also known as 'disease mongering': selling sickness so that the line between healthy and sick becomes blurred and demand for medical
treatment increases.
Our research shows that the pharmaceutical industry makes use of the
leeway offered by current definitions of the term 'information' to market
their medicines through symptom advertising. Pharmaceutical companies
carry out campaigns to draw consumers' attention to diseases or
conditions for which a medicinal solution is available. These campaigns
have a demonstrable effect on medicines use. One example is the
'Schimpie' campaign (the English version of cartoon figure Schimpie was
called 'Digger') that took place in The Netherlands in May 2000), which
drew attention to the risk of fungal nail infection (onychomycosis).
Elements of public information campaigns
The pharmaceutical industry has several ways to communicate with the
public: the Internet, radio and television broadcasting, market research
firms, patient organisations, (online) newspapers and magazines, and a
myriad of social media. For the recipients of this information, it is nearly impossible to determine from the source of the information or who has paid for the campaign.
Even before a medicine becomes available on the market, pre-marketing
activities begin as part of the public information campaign, also called
awareness campaigns. These disease awareness campaigns involve many
parties and are often designed in cooperation with a marketing agency.
They typically start with a press release about the introduction of a new
medicine, possibly in combination with research results that show the
severity of the disease burden. This press release is then taken up by
media, who often interview the medical specialists featured in the press
release.
The marketing agency supports the press release with websites about the
ailment, television and radio commercials, newspaper adverts and paid
editorial content in magazines or on television programmes. Pharmacies
and GP surgeries offer brochures. Information screens in pharmacies refer
to the brochures on display. The brochures direct people to the product
website.
As part of this research, we examined campaigns around restless legs
syndrome (RLS), overactive bladder (OAB) and heartburn. These three case
studies demonstrate that elements of the public information are not in
accordance with the guidelines set by the Dutch General Practitioners
Society (NHG). For example, information about side effects and
information about when medicinal intervention is warranted.
In collaboration with the Dutch critical consumer programme Tros Radar, a
fake public information campaign around the issue of flatulence was
designed, in order to demonstrate the mechanisms typically used in these
campaigns and their effects on the public. We established a fictitious
company with its own website (www.hetluchtop.nl, itclearstheair.nl), and
commissioned TNS NIPO to carry out research into the disease burden.
Promotional materials were prepared and distributed to GP surgeries,
pharmacies and through the website. Based on the research conducted by
TNS NIPO, we sent out a press release and quickly obtained the desired
results: flatulence got a lot of attention in the media.
Recommendations to reduce unwanted effects of public information
campaigns
. restricted use of public information campaigns that focus on symptoms,
if these campaigns are found to stimulate GP consultation or medicines
use;
. a more precise explanation of the difference between information and
advertising in the CGR and KOAG/KAG codes of conduct (Dutch national
self-regulatory codes) (see 'Conclusions'). Establish a separate code for
public information campaigns on disease and health;
. more opportunity for preventive assessment and monitoring of public
information campaigns by the self-regulatory agencies;
. stringent supervision by the Dutch Public Health Inspectorate (IGZ);
. pharmaceutical companies and parties that offer a platform for public
information campaigns should establish or sharpen internal procedures
for their participation in such campaigns, in order to prevent public
advertising or irrational use of medicines;
. professional organisations and patient organisations should be aware of
their role in public information campaigns and ensure that their policies
are geared toward promoting accurate and balanced public information.