Is at the crossroads of competing pressures from industry and health needs

The challenge for governments evaluating direct advertising of prescription only drugs to the consumer is how to achieve maximum benefits for health and wealth while minimising harm. New Zealand's health minister, Annette King, has taken the advice of New Zealand's health professional and consumer groups and has decided that the potential benefits of “direct to consumer advertising” do not justify the harms and so plans to ban it from 2005.^w1 That will leave the United States as the only industrialised country allowing full direct to consumer advertising of prescription medicines. An Australian review of drug legislation in 2001 concluded that prohibiting such advertising produces a net benefit for the community as a whole.1 In 2002, the European Parliament rejected a proposal to allow advertising for drugs used to treat asthma, AIDS, and diabetes directly to the consumer. A 2004 Canadian parliamentary inquiry recommended against direct to consumer advertising because “Drug advertisements could endanger rather than empower consumers by minimizing risk information and exaggerating benefits” and “could contribute to increased or inappropriate drug consumption.”2

Direct to consumer advertising increases the use of drugs and medical services and increases wealth for pharmaceutical, advertising, and media companies.3 It increases prescribers' workloads …