Pharmaceutical Advertising is Propaganda - Special Academic Support

Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?

We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.

You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Click Here To Order Now!

Pharmaceutical Advertising is Propaganda

Table of Contents

Discussion
Counter Argument
Conclusion
References

Fake advertisement is prevalent in various sectors, and it has penetrated the pharmaceutical industry. Businesses have lost much money in fines after being found to be liable to inaccurate advertising, for instance, Purdue Pharma in pharmaceutical industry and Volkswagen in the automotive. The main aim of propaganda is always helping a company either be at the top of their field or increase sales or both. In the drug manufacturing venture, there are many organizations producing different medicines for the same condition. To ensure that a firm stands out from the rest, unauthentic and dishonest promotion of a drug is done. With the growth of the internet and social media, individuals have spread pieces of information about certain drugs. Companies in the United States have previously advertised opioids as a safe drug class.

Drug manufacturing companies in the United States claimed in their promotion of opioid that less than one percent of individuals who consume the drug as prescribed would become addicted to it. This information misled not only the patients but also the doctors who could no longer feel negative about prescribing it. It is important to note that these drugs contain purer forms of heroin. After use, most people were discovered to opt for heroin as soon as their doctors stopped the prescription. This is mainly due to the high prices of opioids as well as the abundance of other drugs. This clearly shows that the advertisements were false, and it led to many more people suffering from addiction. This paper shows how companies in the pharmaceutical industry have used propaganda to earn profits at the expense of many people. It also provides a detailed counter argument that supports that drug advertising is done for the benefit of the patient.

Discussion

Pharmaceutical advertising by organizations is done to mislead individuals, including doctors, to consume products with the intention of making profits. Drug-manufacturing and selling organizations have invested millions in marketing products such as opioids as non-addictive. As it appears, their efforts worked since more people now are consuming than in the previous years. This class of drugs was mainly used for treating cancer patients as well as for the end-of-life care (Failoc-Rojas et al., 2021).

Currently, they are prescribed to more than half of the entire countrys hospital patients. The reason why they have become common in hospitals is due to the notion sold to the doctors, patients, and public that less than one percent of individuals would be addicted to it after using. It is important to note that propaganda means spreading information, ideas, or rumors with the intention of helping a cause, institution, or person. It can also be spread to damage the image or cause of another individual or institution. For instance, the opioid epidemics, as well as associated heroin crisis, have devastated many in almost all American communities.

The drug-class includes lawfully prescribed painkillers such as hydrocodone, oxycodone, codeine, fentanyl, and OxyContin. Often, they are identified brand names, for example, Dilaudid, Demerol, Percocet, and OxyContin. Prescription opioids consisting of purer particles of heroin have in previous been viewed as the fuel of the drug epidemic. It has been proven that once a patient becomes reliant on the drugs, they will surely turn to heroin which is inexpensive as well as abundant (Failoc-Rojas et al., 2021). They do this attempting to avoid withdrawal when a doctor reduces or stops the prescription or when it becomes expensive to continue purchasing.

According to CDC, at least seventy-five percent of new heroin abusers initially consumed a prescribed opioid (Failoc-Rojas et al., 2021). More than two million U.S. citizens are addicted to prescription opioids and are abusing them, while over half a million are addicted to heroin (Failoc-Rojas et al., 2021). Since the early 2000s, the issue has led to many deaths in the country (Failoc-Rojas et al., 2021). As noted by experts in the field, the number of deaths has quadrupled as of 2015 (Failoc-Rojas et al., 2021). This is alarming considering a drug is manufactured to improve life quality.

Another one thousand individuals are treated in emergency departments for issues arising from the misuse of drugs on a daily basis. Over the course of one year, this totals to the whole populace of cities the size of Cleveland, Tampa, or Minneapolis needing urgent care (Hayler, Leahy & Simmons, 2018). In 2007, several Purdue Pharma executives pled guilty to criminal charges for misleading doctors, regulators as well as patients concerning the addictiveness of the drug (Failoc-Rojas et al., 2021). The firm then had to part away with six hundred million dollars in fines to resolve the civil as well as criminal charges for the misbranding of OxyContin. The fine was little when compared to the billions the organization and others gained during the drug epidemic that they started (Failoc-Rojas et al., 2021). Reflecting on the opioid matters evolution, marketing appears as a profitable propaganda.

The companies in their promotions repeatedly lied that even the doctors ultimately believed that it was true in spite of previously thinking differently. They used the technique that many have used even in the past to spread misinformation many times that other people decide to believe. Believing it was the right thing to do, the doctors prescribed the drugs with more frequency. Those with the aim of convincing individuals that opioid is not addictive also utilized their power to hide the truth. They crafted as well as promoted the notion called pseudo-addiction, stating that it refers to the syndrome associated with treatment that causes abnormal behavior that develops as a direct effect of lack of adequate pain management.

Counter Argument

Contrary to what has been mentioned above, pharmaceutical advertising is done to help patients. In the United States, it is believed that informing customers will benefit the drive for medical care reform. A consumer can also benefit from gaining access to various information sources concerning drugs as well as other treatment alternatives instead of depending on health care providers only. The internet has increasingly become a popular source of medical data for many people. A study revealed that more than six thousand adults showed that even though doctors are still the most trusted source, forty-eight percent of the subjects searched online first before a physician (Hayler et al., 2018).

It also revealed that ten percent sought the professionals advice first (Hayler et al., 2018). Pharmaceutical organizations-sponsored websites are ideal in informing patients by communicating safety dangers. This shows that pharmaceutical companies are interested in improving peoples lives and not spreading propaganda. The information they provide helps to encourage the patients to contact a clinician.

A common claim is that direct-to-consumer pharmaceutical advertising forces a patient to consult a medical expert. A survey discovered that exposure to the DTCPA led twenty-seven percent of Americans to seek an appointment with their physician concerning a condition they had failed previously to talk about (Hayler et al., 2018). Another study discovered that the small print in a drug advertisement was strongly related to patients contacting their care providers. The impact of direct-to-consumer pharmaceutical advertising in increasing patient contact with medical professionals could also be advantageous by encouraging dialogue concerning lifestyle changes that better an individuals health. Majority of the professionals in healthcare appear to agree that it is beneficial since it promotes engagement with their clients. In a survey, fifty-three percent of doctors claimed that it led to improved discussions (Hayler et al., 2018). Seventy-three percent believed that it aided individuals to ask more informed questions (Martin et al., 2018). Additionally, it may also assist by promoting awareness as well as detection of negative responses to drugs.

There is adequate proof that dialogue prompted by DTCPA does not always benefit the drug manufacturer since a doctor cannot prescribe according to demands of a patient. In a report by GAO, it is learned that two to seven percent of individuals who asked for a prescription were provided with it as long as another health provider advised on doing that (Martin et al., 2018). Data also suggest that a patient who discusses medication with a physician after watching an advertisement usually receives another treatment or recommendation. Of all the patients who hold discussions with their physicians after seeing a direct-to-customer pharmaceutical advertising, seventy-seven percent reported that the latter recommended health as well as a lifestyle change. This shows that in addition to improving dialogue between patients and doctors, advertising in the pharmaceutical industry can also be said to not be done with the intention of gaining more than enough profits.

Conclusion

This paper has shown through a discussion that pharmaceutical advertising can be propaganda or informative and helpful to the life of a patient. One part agrees with the topic, while the other disagrees. The first part believes that efforts done by companies in the industry are aimed towards generating profits by misleading individuals, including doctors who can prescribe drugs to their patients. These firms spend much money on the promotion of the various products as harmless and with no long-term effects on a life of an individual. Data suggests that this is false especially considering the crisis created by various companies, for example, Purdue Pharma.

The organizations communicated that opioids could not be addictive to more than one percent of the consumers. This gave people hope, and doctors who previously held reservations about the drugs believed too. Obviously, their method worked, as seen in the increase of the prescription of the drug in hospitals in the United States. As mentioned earlier, prescription opioids consist of small quantities of heroin, which means that the patients are most likely to turn to heroin after treatment is done. This leads to addiction which shows that the companies lied in their advertisements and they have risked peoples lives.

While there is a side and data to support against pharmaceutical advertising, there is also information to show that it is important for organizations to promote the drugs. Research revealed that more than six thousand adults claimed that despite the fact a doctor is the most trusted source of medical information, many people still search online for data on various issues. In fact, many of them preferred online sources first before seeing a physician. This means that when these organizations use social media platforms or websites, as used by most businesses currently, people will access the information, thereby helping them have a detailed view according to various sources. Individuals also are able to learn about the various side effects associated with a particular drug. While this does not guarantee that a patient can seek a specific prescription from their doctor, it helps them ask more thoughtful questions that direct their treatment.

References

Failoc-Rojas, V. E., Callirgos-Lozada, C. C., Castro-Maldonado, B., Arce-Villalobos, L. R., Vera-Romero, O. E., & Toro-Huamanchumo, C. J. (2021). Evaluation of medical advertising provided by pharmaceutical companies in printed drug advertising material in Peru. Systematic Reviews in Pharmacy, 12(9), 3159-3162. Web.

Hayler, J. D., Leahy, D. K., & Simmons, E. M. (2018). A pharmaceutical industry perspective on sustainable metal catalysis. Organometallics, 38(1), 36-46. Web.

Martin, K. D., Josephson, B. W., Vadakkepatt, G. G., & Johnson, J. L. (2018). Political management, research and development, and advertising capital in the pharmaceutical industry: a good prognosis?. Journal of Marketing, 82(3), 87-107. Web.

Click Here To Order Now!