Rapid Responses to:
|
|
Rapid Responses: Rapid Responses published:
-
![[Read Rapid Response]](/icons/misc/sectionDOWN.gif)
Clarification and Update for AdWatch on Nexium dialogue
- Peter R Mansfield (30 April 2004)
-
Nexium Australian Advertisement
- Paul B Woods (7 May 2004)
|
|
|||
|
Peter R Mansfield, Director, Healthy Skepticism Inc www.healthyskepticism.org 34 Methodist St, Willunga SA 5172, Australia
Send response to journal:
|
Bob Burton's report is an excellent summary of the main issues. However one sentence requires clarification: "Dr Mansfield argues that comparing esomeprazole 40 mg with various brands of omeprazole 20 mg and lansoprazole 30 mg is inappropriate and was disclosed only in the advertisement's small print." I guess I did not explain the complexities well enough on the phone. The following is more accurate: "Dr Mansfield argues that claiming that esomeprazole 40 mg has "greater power" based only on comparisons with omeprazole 20 mg and lansoprazole 30mg is inappropriate and disclosing those doses only in the advertisement's small print section is unhelpful." (The footnote disclaimer in some of the advertisements is arguably larger than small print but is always in the small print section of the advertisement.) As of 10:15 am Australian Central Standard Time Friday 30 April 2004 we have not even received an acknowledgement from AstraZeneca. Clearly they do not yet have a customer service focused corporate culture. AstraZeneca's defence of their advertising is based mostly on information that is not relevant and omits important relevant information. If AstraZeneca can show that Nexium is better for severe reflux disease then they deserve a price premium but only for that small market. If they want to sell it for everyone with reflux they should make it more cost effective by reducing the price. Meanwhile promotion-driven overuse of Nexium is causing opportunity costs involving significant harm for large numbers of people. If AstraZeneca are unable to make improvements or explain why improvements are not needed then we will have little choice but to make a complaint to the Medicines Australia self-regulatory system. If the Medicines Australia self-regulatory system is unable to achieve improvements or explain why improvements are not needed then we would have little choice but to complain to the government regulatory agencies, medical organisations, politicians and the public. Healthy Skepticism Inc represents a market segment that is small but growing in number and influence. We are health professionals and members of the public who are not willing to accept without question what we are told by vested interests. Drug companies will do better in the long term by learning how to work with us rather than dismiss our carefully documented concerns. Competing interests: I am the director of Healthy Skepticism Inc and the editor of Healthy Skepticism AdWatch. |
|||
|
|
|||
|
Paul B Woods, Global Promotional Consultant Alderley House, Alderley Park, Macclesfield SK10 4TF
Send response to journal:
|
Peter Mansfield seeks to 'clarify and update' your news article and uses the opportunity to restate his opinion of a Nexium advertisement which appeared last year in Australia. He is pursuing his campaign through his Healthy Skepticism Adwatch vehicle. Some 5 months ago, ahead of him publishing his criticisms, we sent him a comprehensive, evidence based response to his challenges about our claims for Nexium. In our advertisement we claim that Nexium 40mg offers greater healing power than omeprazole or lansoprazole. The clinical trial evidence clearly supports that claim and Australian code of practice adjudicators have judged that the claim 'could be supported and was not misleading' . At AstraZeneca we take advertising standards very seriously and went to some considerable trouble to respond fully to Dr Mansfield's concerns. I regret that he appears unwilling to accept the clinical evidence or the judgement of independent adjudicators. Competing interests: I am an employee of AstraZeneca |
|||