Too much information?

Published: 6-Jun-2008

To those who have been following the debate, it will come as little surprise that the public consultation over direct-to-patient advertising of medicines has come out in favour of keeping the current ban.


To those who have been following the debate, it will come as little surprise that the public consultation over direct-to-patient advertising of medicines has come out in favour of keeping the current ban.

There was general agreement that the existing situation needed to be harmonised but without the burden of unnecessary bureaucracy.

There was also a consensus that EU citizens should be provided with understandable, objective, high-quality and non-promotional information, while ensuring that there is a clear distinction between that and advertising. But there were no suggestions as to how this distinction should be made.

One major issue that emerged was the role of the media in disseminating the information. TV and radio were considered unsuitable channels of information, whereas printed media and the Internet were more favoured.

There is no doubt that health stories sell newspapers, particularly if they involve either a "miracle cure" or a medical disaster, the blame for which can usually be laid at Big Pharma's door.

Recently, a popular UK paper told its readers that cocoa may be good for the heart; that celery can help with brain diseases such as Alzheimers; that gum disease increases the risk of cancer; that tree bark may ease arthritis; and that peanut butter stops hiccups.

Now, there may be some truth behind some or even all of these, but newspapers have never been inclined to let the facts get in the way of a good story. The cocoa item, for example, was based on a study in diabetic patients looking at the effect of flavanol-enhanced cocoa in the main artery in the upper arm, not the heart. Not only is the cocoa in question not available for purchase, but the story also failed to say that fruit and vege-tables are also a good source of flavanols but without the sugar and fat.

On the other hand, since the study was funded by a major confectionery manufacturer, maybe that's not so surprising.

Ultimately, it boils down to trust, and - leaving aside the corruption allegations in the Italian pharma sector - sadly it appears that the average consumer places greater faith in what they get from their newspaper than in the patient information leaflet (if they bother to read the latter at all).

In the meantime, if you read in your newspaper of a surge in sales of chocolate-coated celery or peanut butter flavoured toothpaste in the UK, you'll know why.

You may also like