Karllen Johnson

Human Biology, MW 9AM

Taking Sides 1
Drug Advertising

1) Paul Antony for the yes side asserts that because of direct to
consumer advertising, many Americans are being more
inquisitive and open with their doctors, more involved in the
decision making regarding their own health care, and are more
likely to take prescriptions correctly and as needed.
2) David A. Kessler and Douglas A. Levy for the no side argue that
Americans who make their own health care decisions based upon
what they read in a magazine ad or see on television are more
likely to incorrectly self-diagnose, be persuaded to buy more
expensive medication, or avoid alternative treatment options
such as healthy lifestyle choices.
3) Yes Fact 1: Antony quotes from the Archives of Internal
Medicines 2004 study that, In older patients, failures to
prescribe indicated medications, monitor medications
appropriately, document necessary information, educate
patients, and maintain continuity are more common prescribing
problems than is use of inappropriate drugs.
Yes Fact 2: Out of approximately 61 million adults who had
discussions with their physicians after seeing a DTC
advertisement, only approx. 8.5 million actually received a

prescription, according to the 2001 report from a General

Accounting Office.
4) No Fact 1: From 2001 to 2005, pharmaceutical spending nearly
doubled from $654 million to $1.19 billion dollars.
No Fact 2: According to an FDA survey of physicians in 2002,
41% felt their patients were confused as a result of DTC ads,
about 35% of the physicians and specialists felt some pressure to
prescribe said drugs at patient request.
5) Yes Opinion 1: Antony states that when it comes to making a
decision about a prescription, the doctors opinion should always
take precedence.
Yes Opinion 2: Antony states that patients might not discuss
certain problems with their doctor because of a stigma being
attached to the disease, and DTC ads help.
6) No Opinion 1: They state that patients expect a simple stroke
of a pen onto a prescription pad will fix all their problems.
No Opinion 2: They state that patients always expect to hear a
simple answer to a complicated question.
7) Yes Fallacy: He states that although there has been increased
spending on pharmaceutical care, it leads to lower spending in
the long run on non-drug medical spending. I think its
misleading because who is really saving money in the long run?
If a patient could use an alternative treatment method, even if
its more costly up front, that would fix the problem rather than
mask it with medication, its possible it could be better for them
in the long run.

8) No Fallacy: They state that physicians take all factors into

consideration before writing a prescription, such as medical
history, lifestyle and insurance, etc. I think its misleading
because I have had personal experiences with doctors who would
much rather write a prescription than spend time looking deeper
into a problem. This statement makes it sound like ALL doctors
make well-informed decisions when it could be that some doctors
dont have those intentions.
9) Although I feel both sides have valid points, and I personally feel
that the country is over-medicated due to many reasons,
Antonys testimonial has much more verifiable facts and more
information in general. I would need much more information from
the no side to see its legitimacy.
10)
Antonys testimonial was much more impressive. I
personally feel it was very biased as he indeed works for the
pharmaceutical industry, but he made a very good case and left
little room for debate. What I didnt agree with is how perfectly
well intentioned he made the industry out to be, when I feel
money plays a much bigger role than he let on.
11)
The authors on the no side had points that I could easily
agree with, they just didnt sound as educated and verifiable as
Antony. I suppose they may be biased because theyve had
personal experiences like I have where they felt taken advantage
of by the pharmaceutical industry.