Would Hundreds of Women Have Been Saved by Legislation Limiting Direct-To-Consumer Advertising?

On the heels of the FDA's admonishment of Bayer Corporation regarding it's Yaz commercials, a handful of legislators are trying to limit direct-to-consumer advertising for pharmaceuticals. As I have discussed in previous posts, the FDA has taken an unusually harsh stance against Bayer's Yaz marketing resulting in Bayer agreeing to spend $20 million to correct its misleading ads. The problem with this corrective action is that the damage to hundreds, if not thousands of women, is already done. That's one reason legislators are seeking to limit direct-to-consumer advertising.

For instance, Representative Harry Waxman, Democrat of California, favors legislation that gives the FDA the power to bar direct-to-consumer advertising for new drugs for a period of time. Under this scenario, the FDA could limit advertising on new drugs for an initial period after approval. During that initial period following FDA approval, there will be more real world experience with the drugs, and the reasoning goes that drugs' warning labels can be modified to address any serious side effects that occur during that time.

Legislation like that suggested by Rep. Waxman may very well have saved many women from life-altering injuries following their use of Yaz and Yasmin. If you, or a loved one suffered serious injuries after using Yaz or Yasmin, I encourage you to contact your representative to show your support for limits on direct-to-consumer advertising of pharmaceuticals.