WASHINGTON   –  “Anyone wanting proof that the name-brand pharmaceutical industry in the United States is a well-heeled business need look no further than a fine assessed on one company by the federal government earlier this month.  Drug company Pfizer will be compelled to pay a record $2.3 billion in civil and criminal penalties for improperly marketing one of their products.  In short, the pharmaceutical giant marketed drugs for conditions and illnesses they were not approved to treat.

At the heart of the record fine is the $4.3 billion spent every year on advertising for prescription drugs.  I’m sure you know the pills I’m talking about (if you don’t, just flip on the television for five minutes and you’re sure to see one of their commercials).  To me, these ads are just another reason why the television stays off during dinner.  But a worthwhile movement is afoot in Congress to remove these ads from the airwaves altogether, and I think it deserves some serious consideration.

The fact that these ads are bringing terminology like “male enhancement” into our dining rooms is one thing, quite another is the fact that these ads sometimes invent conditions – or popularize them – to sell their pills.  Already, the Food and Drug Administration monitors these ads for truthfulness and safety considerations.  So far this year, they have issued 28 percent more citations for false and misleading ads than for the same period of time last year.  The quality of information being conveyed to the consumer in the name of pill sales is a serious concern for all of us.

The huge amount of spending on advertising carries another consequence worth talking about: ultimately, consumers pay for it.

The 15 best-selling prescription drugs in the U.S. last year earned more than $58 billion in sales.  When we hear that health care accounts for 15 percent of the U.S. economy, name-brand prescription drugs are a major reason why.  Yet the pharmaceutical industry managed to leave the White House’s negotiating table over health care with an agreement to only lower costs by $80 billion over ten years.

Americans who watch the ads the FDA spends valuable time and tax dollars regulating have the right to ask if they would be better off without them.  We deserve to know if the next illness we hear about between innings of the Cardinals baseball game is a true health hazard that should concern us or only a new effort to play on the insecurities of our private lives.  And we ought to ask, too, if less spending on ads for drugs could also show up as lower costs on the medicines we truly need and often can’t afford.

My personal standard is the best one possible for a health care consumer, I think.  I only ask for prescriptions my doctor tells me I need, not prescriptions the drug companies tell me I need.  But the savvy marketers of prescription drugs have a plan for that, too.  They pepper health care providers of all kinds with freebies and promotional items that create “brand recognition” when your doctor puts the pen to the prescription pad.

My advice?  Ask for the generic instead.”