I was at a social event recently and when I explained that a lot of my time is spent on market research in the pharma industry, somebody said that drug companies should not be allowed to advertise, and that the money should be spent on research.

Last year, The Chicago Tribune ran an article asking whether drug ads help patients or lead to expensive treatments.  The article noted that, according to Kantar Media, pharma companies spent $4.5 billion on direct to consumer advertising in 2014.  Let me mention a couple of arguments against advertising raised in the article, and then provide thoughts.

1. Medical decisions should be made by doctors, not uninformed consumers.

Rebuttal:  Obviously medical decisions should be made by doctors.  But at the end of the day, it is the doctor writing the prescription, not the consumer.  I personally cannot recall an ad for a prescription medication that implored: “Tell your doctor to prescribe…”  The ads suggest: “Ask your doctor about…”  The purpose is to both educate the consumer and motivate the consumer to have a conversation, not demand a prescription.

2. Advertising pressures doctors to prescribe particular medications-often drugs that may be less expensive and more risky.

Rebuttal:  While this is probably true in a small number of cases, I would think that the vast majority of doctors realize that they are the expert, would not be pressured by advertising, and would counsel the patient on what is best.

3. The resulting conversations can waste a doctor’s time.

Rebuttal:  I get that doctors are squeezed for time.  But sorry, if I am a patient and I have seen or heard something about a drug that can help me in an ad, on the Internet…wherever, I am going to expect my doctor to take the necessary time and discuss it with me.

4. Advertising contributes to high drug prices.

Rebuttal:  Americans spent $374 billion on prescription drugs in 2014, according to IMS Health.  The $4.5 billion spent on DTC advertising is 1.2% of that.  So it is hard to imagine that advertising had much of an impact, if any, on pricing.

5. Advertising casts doubt on the claim that most pharma costs are related to research and development.

Rebuttal:  It may indeed cast doubt.  But if it does, it is a perception issue that pharma companies will have to address.  The reality is that pharma companies spend exponentially more on R&D than advertising.  The Pharmaceutical Research and Management Association reported that in 2014, its members spent $41.1 billion in R&D in the United States.  Compare that to the $4.5 billion spent on advertising.

6. The ads carry a risk of exposing more patients to the adverse effects of new drugs.

Rebuttal: True if more patients use the drugs more patients will be exposed to the adverse effects.  But they will also be “exposed” to the possibility that the drugs will help them.  That is what the physician-patient conversation is all about.