Drug Safety, Social Media & A Universal Symbol
16 CommentsBy Ed Silverman // March 10th, 2010 // 8:53 am
In a briefing yesterday about social media, the PhRMA trade group reiterated its proposal that the FDA should allow drugmakers to use a universal symbol that would indicate a link to risk information online. “The use of the FDA’s own logo or other FDA-approved symbol would shine a brighter spotlight on official Web sites of FDA-approved medical products containing reliable and comprehensive information about medicines’ benefits and risks,” PhRMA contends.
The trade group first suggested this last November, when the agency held a hearing about social media. That followed controversial warning letters issued last spring by the FDA to 14 drugmakers for failing to include risk info in their search ads. Since then, the industry has been grappling with ways to provide fair balance in sponsored search results without any actual guidance from the agency. Besides a symbol, PhRMA also suggests direct links to warning info and “responsible” Tweeting (see the PhRMA comments to the FDA).
In any event, the FDA will have to find ways to enforce the use of the symbol and work with the Federal Trade Commission to do so (for an overview of the issue, see The Pink Sheet). What do you think?
Is a Universal Symbol a Useful Idea?
- Yes (57%, 56 Votes)
- No (43%, 43 Votes)
Total Voters: 99
Loading ...
Stephany
If they use the clown you’ve got here, then great! because the FDA’s seal of approval means NOTHING!
SteveM
Re: Stephany
Right, because the link will be to either a Pharma itemized list which is always truncated and word gamed to minimize side effect severity, or the FDA product information sheet which is unintelligible to the average consumer. Either way, the poor slob is still flying blind when he takes stuff.
Maybe use a skull and crossbones icon to at least give the consumer a crude heads up.
Salmon
I vote for showing Don Corleone.
MsPiggy
Oh Yes, this would be great; like using the “certified used car” symbol as a verified quality assurance standard.
Basically Pharma wants to use the FDA symbol as another legal/public relations/marketing layer for their next Avandia, Seroquel, Vioxx, etc.
Though I do agree with Stephany, I would accept the “Krusty the Clown” symbol as a factual representation of the FDA’s always stellar work.
Justice in MI
Ed–Even among other stellar graphics, this one is near the top of the charts. LMAO.
Anyone see ABC’s story on Fosamax a couple of nights’ ago? I’ve never seen a mainstream network do a lead story like this, including unfurling the PI to demonstrate how difficult it would be for anyone–even the paranoid hypervigilant–to find the six words suggesting the risk. Also noting how long it took to get even that.
So much for the FDAAA.
Stephany
Pharma wants the FDA to create seal of approval - http://tinyurl.com/yk6r3xa GO VOTE FOR A SYMBOL!
David, Health Blogger
I voted yes for this idea but with extreme reluctance. We all want government to be as small as possible; only in the area of health - for me, at least - could we even consider allowing the government such power.
Yet I believe that an 80 year old grandmother who is looking for the potential issues with her medication should be able to get the real scoop from the company website.
It’s easy to reduce the issue to stories and so on but, if pressed, this is something I would support.
elmore
What about requiring links to both the benefits and the risks? The ads could be limited to the name of the drug and what it treats.
JaT
Perfect graphic, Ed.
The problem is that one person, not so long ago, said that a CDER page was replaced by (or redirected her to?) the drug company product information page. I took her to mean that they lost information needed to do research.
And also- this is like preemption without official preemption.
Condor
I appear here to echo JiM’s and JaT’s — “the only [medicines] endorsed by a clown — CanyonArrow!”
HILARIOUS — sad, but hilarious!
Hopefully, I get back to offer something more substantive, later this evening — gotta’ jet.
Namaste
Condor
On substance — I remain unclear why companies NEED to be able to tweet about FDA-regulated drugs.
Next, should we allow “cold calls” — via telemarketing style cubicle-seascapes (in wharehouses in New Jersey), from which the companies could call the last 100,000 names to see their doctors about cholesterol — and direct pitch Vytorin, Crestor or Lipitor via a scripted phone call?????
This is my old-fashioned question:
Where is the ENTITLEMENT to make unsolicited sales calls (electronically — via Twitter; or by telephone, via a telemarketing firm-style approach) direct to CONSUMERS of drugs they MUST see their doctors to obtain????
Serious question.
[By the way, I am also well-vesed in the development of the path of the law -- the jurisprudence -- surrounding commercial speech, and that one doesn't really fly for me, here. This is akin to a telemarketing call. Why should we countenance that?]
Safety alerts via Twitter would be a horse of a different color.
Namaste
Condor
Meant to type “WHOre” houses (warehouses) in that second line of ‘graph two. . . Dag.
Namaste
New York liposuctions
Basically Pharma wants to use the FDA symbol as another legal/public relations/marketing layer for their next Avandia, Seroquel etc. The problem is that one person, not so long ago, said that a CDER page was replaced by the drug company product information page.
vince
“Bozo the clown” would seems a better symbol” balanced information and drug marketing simply don’t mix. Preemption is where the drug companies really want to go.
patrons99
OMG! Stephany’s link above is absolutely priceless! It’s a very close horse race, indeed. Probably a photo finish. Too close to call.
pharmavet
Even the Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval only carries a two-year limited warranty on its certified products. Maybe the FDA/Pharma logo should also carry a 2-year limited warranty in case the product kills you after the second year of use.
These “seals” are completely bogus. I used to belong to the American Heart Association, and therefore know that if a company wanted its products to be deemed “heart-healthy” (you know, those cute little heart shaped logos on packages), all it had to do was make a nice contribution to the AHA. Has as much merit as “certified” automobile parts from ex-US that the auto insurers will only reimburse you for aftern you’ve had a wreck.