It is documented fact that I watch too much TV.* Well, maybe watch isn’t the right word. I like to have something on in the background when I am home. Otherwise the silence starts to close in sometimes.
As such, I am privileged to hear all the ads. Turns out there are a lot of ads touching on healthcare, including discussions of high drug prices, wellness, or the latest drugs to treat certain diseases. The one that caught my ear recently was one for GoLo, a “treatment” for insulin resistance. As someone who has insulin resistance, I was curious to find out what they were selling.
There was a lot wrong with the ad. First, they speak about insulin resistance as if it was a separate condition. It’s not. It’s a symptom or side effect of diabetes (Types 1 and 2), and a lot of other lifestyle factors: obesity, smoking, age, sedentary lifestyle, etc. Second, the implied claim, that their product can cure insulin resistance, is muddy and misleading at best. There is no cure beyond addressing those lifestyle factors and underlying conditions, and they never say that GoLo is just another supplement. Taking it will not make insulin resistance go away.
I am not surprised at the misinformation in the ad. Of course their main goal is to make money on an unnecessary product, and the healthcare arena is particularly vulnerable since we are always looking for the next best thing to fix what ails us. It’s a dangerous trap, and you should always talk to your doctor before starting a new treatment, even over-the-counter ones. You never know how they will affect your current course of treatment or exacerbate your condition. The companies may be legally obligated to list side effects, but does anyone ever catch those?
And it’s not just the treatments, either. There are some sneaky little issue ads out there, too. A while back, I heard one not unlike the issue ads that tanked the 1993 healthcare bill. Instead of a couple in their 60s sitting at their kitchen table, this one featured a woman on the phone with a pharmacy benefits manager (PBM – these are the negotiating arms of your Express Scripts, CVSs, Walgreens, etc. that are supposed to get better prices out of the drugmakers). Since I harbor a particular loathing for PBMs, I was again curious what was being said and who was saying it.
This ad concluded with the caller saying that basically PBMs were unnecessary middlemen negotiating rebates that never got to the patient and causing drug prices to get to where they are now. I don’t disagree. PBMs bear a large share of the guilt here. But the ad was paid for by PhRMA. PhRMA! The drugmakers themselves, hoping to make the PBMs bigger bad guys than they are. Like they haven’t had at least as much to do with high drug prices? And now PBMs are so big they have their own lobbying group.
We don’t really think about ads, at least not consciously. But I learned in a communications class that all that’s needed to get a message to imprint is to hear it 10 times. That’s why we are blanked with political ads during elections. Whether you agree with them or not, hearing them that many times guarantees that you will remember them on election day.
It’s the same here. A lot of these new treatments are interesting, tempting for those who have the condition. And the issue ads may seem clarifying. But before you take any of them seriously, understand the motivations. And consider the source.
*I think this was Dad rant #37 or so.