The scene is this: a doctor, strictly in white, who talks about breast cancer and a patient who reassures the audience that there are many treatments available. It's the 10-minute pilot film of Pharma TV, anticipated by the Guardian. What is it about? A digital, interactive channel entirely dedicated to and funded by the pharmaceutical industry. The proposal was launched by four of the world's leading pharmaceutical companies, Johnson & Johnson, Pfizer, Novartis and Procter & Gamble, who are also asking in Europe for the revision of the laws that prohibit direct advertising of medicines to the consumer. It is, in fact, a real television broadcaster to reach the general public without intermediaries.
The proposal was presented by J&J during a meeting at the Center for Health, Ethics and Society, held in Brussels. The channel, which should also be made available on the Internet, will be digital and interactive, with news on health and on the offer of medicines from the industries that sponsor the services. The user can click on the area of interest corresponding to the various pathologies and get detailed information on what treatments are available for each of them. And a host in a white coat will help viewers navigate the various topics. The companies have been explicit: fewer restrictions would favor more competitiveness in the sector and if similar measures were not taken, they could move the business overseas, to the United States, where advertising is allowed.
And what does the European Union think? For the moment, the proposal to open up to direct advertising is being evaluated by the Enterprise division of the European Commission and is supported by some patient associations, which in turn are largely financed by companies. The game of the roles is the usual, given that, however, the consumer associations oppose it. The reason? The drug companies' only goal is to increase profits. But the Pharma TV project, the companies respond, also aims to demonstrate how the ban on direct advertising is harmful to the industry. A prestigious institution such as the International Society of Drug Bulletins (Isdb), which deals with publishing reports comparing the effectiveness of various drugs, for its part, increases the dose: the industry is certainly not a reliable source information on medicines. Indeed, in the USA and New Zealand, where direct advertising to the sick is permitted, there is a deterioration in the health conditions of the population. To underline the unreliability of the sources and the risks for patients. And the lack of comparative information is the main charge. Ultimately, as reported by the Guardian, the opinion of the European Patient's Forum is favourable, one of the two patient associations that are part of the European Commission's working group for the discussion on the change of rules on advertising. The new channel, according to the association, could be a positive novelty. But make the appropriate changes. Which? A less "hypocritical and condescending" tone. Marco Malagutti
The proposal was presented by J&J during a meeting at the Center for Health, Ethics and Society, held in Brussels. The channel, which should also be made available on the Internet, will be digital and interactive, with news on health and on the offer of medicines from the industries that sponsor the services. The user can click on the area of interest corresponding to the various pathologies and get detailed information on what treatments are available for each of them. And a host in a white coat will help viewers navigate the various topics. The companies have been explicit: fewer restrictions would favor more competitiveness in the sector and if similar measures were not taken, they could move the business overseas, to the United States, where advertising is allowed.
And what does the European Union think? For the moment, the proposal to open up to direct advertising is being evaluated by the Enterprise division of the European Commission and is supported by some patient associations, which in turn are largely financed by companies. The game of the roles is the usual, given that, however, the consumer associations oppose it. The reason? The drug companies' only goal is to increase profits. But the Pharma TV project, the companies respond, also aims to demonstrate how the ban on direct advertising is harmful to the industry. A prestigious institution such as the International Society of Drug Bulletins (Isdb), which deals with publishing reports comparing the effectiveness of various drugs, for its part, increases the dose: the industry is certainly not a reliable source information on medicines. Indeed, in the USA and New Zealand, where direct advertising to the sick is permitted, there is a deterioration in the health conditions of the population. To underline the unreliability of the sources and the risks for patients. And the lack of comparative information is the main charge. Ultimately, as reported by the Guardian, the opinion of the European Patient's Forum is favourable, one of the two patient associations that are part of the European Commission's working group for the discussion on the change of rules on advertising. The new channel, according to the association, could be a positive novelty. But make the appropriate changes. Which? A less "hypocritical and condescending" tone. Marco Malagutti
Source "pharmamarketing.it"
