Dcpa Pros And Cons

In America’s society, advertisements are everywhere. There are many commercials and magazine spreads dedicated to the promotion of doctor prescribed medications. Known as direct-to-consumer pharmaceutical advertising (DTCPA), new information is showing these could be more harmful than beneficial. Marketing of these drugs, unbeknownst to consumers, often takes place before information of long-term safety is known. Furthermore, patient’s views of doctoral qualifications can be undermined if the practitioner fails to prescribe the requested medication. Arguments for the benefits of DTCPA are often outweighed by the harms they cause. Banned in every country except New Zealand and the United States, DTCPA that includes product claims are more harmful than positive. Before the long-term safety of a drug is known, it is often already being presented to the public. Also, FDA clinical trials that are required for product approval characteristically are not constructed to identify rare and adverse effects. Take Vioxx for instance. Vioxx was a heavily promoted drug in the late 1990s and early 2000s. With over $100 million spent in advertising by Merck, the drug raked in over $1 billion annually. Asking for Vioxx, thinking it was a superior medication, patients were not aware that the drug could lead to heart attacks
DTCPA can interfere by encouraging patients to request an inappropriate drug. When a doctor declines to write a prescription for the requested medicine, it can lead to patients questioning the qualifications of the physician. This has a negative impact and is shown increase patient switching of physicians due to the decrease in their satisfaction. With this in doctor’s minds, it can lead to pressure to prescribe the wrong medicine simply because it was asked for. Unnecessary interference of a doctor-patient relationship could be eliminated with the removal of