You Can't Put A Big Bow On A Cancer Diagnosis

When a cancer treatment commercial airs, the people are happy and smiling. The drug or medical center promises they will cure you and you will be back to yourself soon. They want you to believe that they will make it all better.

They are full of bullshit.

"Patients and families are bombarded with the news that the country is winning the war against cancer. The news media hypes research results to attract readers. Drug companies promise "a chance to live longer" to boost sales. Hospitals woo paying customers with ads that appeal to patients' fears and hopes.
"I'm starting to hear more and more that we are better than I think we really are," said Dr. Otis Brawley, chief medical officer at the American Cancer Society. "We're starting to believe our own bullshit."

The consequences are real -- and they can be deadly. Patients and their families have bought into treatments that either don't work, cost a fortune or cause life-threatening side effects.

"We have a lot of patients who spend their families into bankruptcy getting a hyped therapy that [many] know is worthless," Brawley said. Some choose a medicine that "has a lot of hype around it and unfortunately lose their chance for a cure."

Cancer doesn't come with a pretty bow on it (or a stupid ribbon). Basically cancer is nasty. Its a date with death unless you get lucky.

Current advertising wants you to believe they can cure your cancer and keep you smiling. They make all sorts of promises. But those promises are vague. they can extend your life.

But they do not tell you how long - either the medical centers or the pharmaceutical manufacturers - and it could very well only be a couple of months. And those side effects that are printed in tiny type at the bottom of the ad? Well how about a lot of quality time in the bathroom with diarrhea, extreme pain, fever, chills, and shakes? They never tell you that part.

So perhaps there is a little 'fake news' in the commercials for these cancer treatment centers and the treatments themselves. And they do not even provide enough information for patients anyway.

With a cancer diagnosis, we need to not believe the hype and accept the facts while we find the best treatment options for us.

Advertising medications

Currently the AMA wants the US government to stop allowing manufacturers to advertise prescription medications and medical devices directly to consumers. Why? Because it makes patients ask for unnecessary medications. And those advertising campaigns aren't cheap - they cost millions - adding unnecessary amounts to the industry.

The FDA allowed this kind of advertising starting in 1997. The first ad for a prescription medication was in 1983 and was pulled after a few days.

The US and New Zealand are the only countries which allow this kind of advertising. Personally I wouldn't mind reading a magazine which was not full of pages of fine print of disclosures of side effects and watching TV without commercials with the soft voice over of potential issues.

I think its a complete waste of money for all these ads. If you see a medication advertised, you have no way of knowing if it will work for you or is really needed even if you have that condition. I just ignore those ads anyway and would be happy never to see one again.

Going for the heart strings, of course

There was a new study (because we need a new study so the researchers don't have to polish up their CVs -  that's resume for the non-technical) that says there are more and more ads for cancer treatments and cancer treatment centers. Their results showed that:

"A systematic content analysis of these ads found that the content is sharply directed at a would-be patient’s heartstrings:

  – 85% made emotional appeals to consumers
  – 61% used language about hope, extension of life, or a cure
  – 52% touted innovative, or advanced technology or treatments
  – 30% evoked fear by mentioned death, fear, or loss

Nearly half of the advertisements included patient testimonials, but only 15% included a disclaimer about patient outcome. No advertisements described the outcomes a “typical” patient may experience. Failure to disclose this information is a violation of a Federal Trade Commission mandate, the report notes."

Only 2% of the ads disclosed the risks and 5% disclosed the costs. Basically, they skipped right over the parts that say you might be throwing up as you are going bankrupt... but I digress.

Emotion based advertising is a key target in the advertising world. Feel their pain and you can make them open their wallets. But evoking fear of death is kind of creepy. If you don't try this, you WILL die!

"“Clinical advertisements that use emotional appeal uncoupled with information about indications, benefits, risks, or alternatives may lead patients to pursue care that is either unnecessary or unsupported by scientific evidence.”"

The researchers conclude by saying that further research is needed to see if this emotion based, direct to consumer advertising is contributing to the sky rocketing cancer care costs in recent years. (Job security.)  If it is promoting misinformation by omission of key information for consumers and playing on their emotions, its not a great use of the money.

My thought is all this advertising is clearly contributing to pharmaceutical company and medical center bottom lines through additional costs. Which in turn is bumping up their overhead. The kind of advertising that is done is not cheap. So maybe we should just get rid of it - just as we got rid of alcohol and tobacco advertising in the past and their costs would go down, and then our prices. But that would be a pipe dream on our part.

Prescription drug commercials

Doesn't anyone wonder why we have to put up with the warnings on drug ads and commercials? The FDA is considering shortening these lovely side effect lists that we all like to make fun of.

I have a better idea. Why don't they ban direct to consumer advertising for prescription medication. I found out that it is illegal everywhere except the US and New Zealand. So why can't they just get rid of it?

"Those who dislike the practice, according to ProCon.org, might argue that the money spent on advertising is passed on to consumers. Ads cause people to pick medicines based on the effectiveness of the ad rather than the effectiveness of the medication, and ads cause patients to desire and request medications from their doctors that may be unnecessary, thus leading to an over-medicated and unhealthy society. Those in favor of these ads argue that consumers should be informed about medical conditions and therapies, and the ads even help to de-stigmatize certain conditions. The ads might even be said to help demystify medical treatment and doctors themselves, who should not be seen in such a powerful, almost godly light."

The argument that some people will pick medicines based on the effectivness of the ad not the medication is valid. But I will agree that the ads might help de-stigmatize certain medical conditions. Who remembers being embarrassed in elementary school when your mother would write a note that said you had 'diarrhea' and had to stay home? Now we can blog about cancer and not piss off most normal people (a note to the British blogger).

Lets just say they spend $5 billion (with a b, not an m) in direct to consumer advertising each year. What if they applied that tiny chunk of change to lowering their prices? They also spend another $20 billion promoting their products in other ways - this would be maybe (and I am speculating here) conferences, speaker fees, packaging, market research, and more.That $20 billion could also help reduce medication costs.

This is all my opinion but I don't think those ads have ever helped much - just confuse everyone with their side effect lists. And allow the creative ones among us to create endless spoofs. If they are becoming a joke in popular culture, that might give you an idea of how well the ads really work.

Hospital advertising

I have wondered why hospitals seem to spend more and more on advertising. Radio, tv, bill boards - they seem to be increasing more and more. I haven't figured this out until light dawned on me - some marketing person or advertising executive convinced them they needed to advertise.

Let's take a poll here - who chooses their medical care based on a billboard or tv ad? One vote here for no. I put a little bit more research into it than that. I might ask my doctor, ask friends and family, consider how long the drive would be (because of my inherent laziness), and maybe even go look at their websites.

This morning while watching the news, an ad came on for some hospital explaining breast tomography and how good it was at detecting tumors. So therefore you should go there for breast tomography. But they forgot the important point of why tomography - is it instead of mammograms? Or if you have a 'bad' mammogram? It didn't entice me to go there at all.

The news was just interrupted by a commercial advertising another hospital's cancer center. Every hospital seems to be advertising their cancer center more and more. Why, do they expect us all to be diagnosed and come running to them for treatment because we saw them on TV or on a billboard? Cancer center's seem to be the latest fad in hospital advertising. Everyone is getting one.  So it becomes an unending game of one-upmanship.

I am  a marketing person so I understand there can be many purposes to advertising - image enhancement or promotion for a sale or event. If they are focusing on enhancing their image, I'm not sure that tv ads are a good way to spend the money. TV ads are expensive to start - you need a budget that is a upper five figures to start. Maybe they could spend some of that money on patient care instead of advertising.