A couple of thoughts on this NYT article about advertising heart stents. First, I was one of the people who was able to see the game (NFL -- way to go dudes, screw your fans -- that always works out in the end, just check in on the music industry to see how the story ends), and when I saw the ad, I said, "wow, there goes a waste of money." As the story notes:
The Cypher television spot might be mystifyingly vague to viewers who have never heard of stents, which are implanted in blood vessels to prop them open after blockages have been cleared. Cypher was designed for the vital network of arteries that keep the heart nourished with oxygen. The aim in using it is lasting relief from chest pains and shortness of breath, the symptoms of clogged coronary arteries known as angina.
In some ways, we're so inured to medical advertising on TV it would be easy to miss this one. In addition, my family plays a game "what's this ad about" when we see a new ad- - car? perfume? clothes? and we all whiffed on what the cypher ad was going to be about. Of course, the stent ad stirred up controversy, as do many direct to consumer drug/medical device advertising:
Not surprisingly, the campaign has stirred criticism among doctors who oppose direct-to-consumer advertising of drugs and devices, and especially among doctors who contend that stents are being implanted too often in patients who might do better with other treatments.
“It’s deplorable,” said Dr. William E. Boden, a professor of medicine at the State University of New York at Buffalo. “You’ve got to wonder whether it’s a sign of desperation.”
In fairness, the stent story is not easy to tell fully in 60 minutes, much less 60 seconds or a single-page print ad.
I find myself in a bit of a conundrum here. First, in a world of transparency and direct communication, don't we want to encourage the free flow of information, via multiple channels, to include ads? I think the answer is yes. Second, since you and me are paying for the additional costs associated with increased demand for medical products that don't really work any better than what's out there, don't we want some limits on medical ads in particular? Of course.
I actually think the solution is very easy and will never happen. Let the ads roll -- but once an ad runs, the company loses the ability to have insurance pay for the treatment for the next xx months. Simple and easy. Information is still out there -- but the cost is born by either the person deciding to go for the more expensive option, not us.
Finally, cool song to accompany the commercial. It's "c'mon" by Guster and is now part of my running mix, ensuring I don't become a stent candidate in the near future...
Technorati tags:
advertising