The White House’s recent memorandum directing the FDA to rein in direct-to-consumer (DTC) pharmaceutical advertising has reignited a long-running debate about the role of advertising in American health.
Despite the back and forth, the administration’s critics and proponents should agree that misleading ads are not beneficial. However, removing all health ads would erase an important public good, as up to 30% of Americans rely on pharmaceutical ads to help them recognize illness and discover treatment options.
Over the past several decades, the relationship between patients and the healthcare ecosystem has evolved, centering patient voices increasingly in treatment decisions. New therapeutics and advances in precision medicine are creating phenomenal, life-extending cures, and in order to be active participants in their health journey, patients need to be armed with information; DTC messaging is an invaluable tool for this.
Doing away with all pharmaceutical marketing would limit access to health information and disproportionately harm those with the lowest health literacy, since research shows that minority groups are even more likely to take action after seeing a pharma ad. Here’s why a wholesale retreat from DTC would be a mistake, and how to improve the landscape without putting vulnerable patients at risk.
DTC saves lives by raising awareness and driving action
For many Americans, television and online ads are how they first learn that a symptom is not “just aging” or “just stress.” Multiple surveys and studies have indicated that DTC ads can serve as a useful starting point for individuals to have conversations with their healthcare providers about new symptoms or new treatment options — many of whom may not have previously known there were treatment options available.
For example, a study looking at DTC advertising of statins found that patients who had seen ads for these medications were 16-20% more likely to get a diagnosis for high cholesterol. Treatment of chronic conditions like this rely on adherence and reinforcement of continuous use of maintenance medications.
Additionally, a 2017 FDA-sponsored national survey found that advertisements boost awareness of new treatments. Over a third of respondents sought further information after seeing an ad, and among those seekers, 64.6% spoke with their doctor (with 90.5% of all respondents saying they’d turn to a clinician for risk questions). Pharma advertising does not subvert the role of the provider, instead, it often motivates the patient to talk to their doctor. While critics argue that pharmaceutical ads create artificial demand, they actually equip patients with more information, so they can ask more pointed questions during an appointment.
Physicians themselves tend to agree. Surveys show more than 90% of doctors believe pharma ads improve patients’ awareness of treatment options and understanding of their conditions. Nearly as many say advertisements encourage valuable patient-HCP conversations. That dialogue is exactly what regulators and HCPs want: engaged patients taking an active role in their care.
A gap in health literacy makes advertising a lifeline
These valuable patient-HCP conversations are crucial, however, the U.S. is reportedly facing a health literacy issue. Health literacy is defined as the extent to which a person can access health-related information and apply this information. According to research, only about 12% of Americans have the level of health literacy needed to efficiently navigate the health system, understand health information, follow doctor’s instructions, and adhere to complex treatment regimens.
Low health literacy disproportionately impacts some of our most vulnerable populations: adults over 65 have the lowest levels of health literacy, with almost one-third (29%) showing “below basic levels” of health literacy. 41% of Hispanic people, 25% of Native Americans, and 24% of African Americans also demonstrate lower levels, compared to just 9% of white people. In addition, 42% of individuals who report being in poor health have “below basic knowledge” of health literacy.
In part, this stems from the fact that people with low health literacy are less aware of health conditions and their treatments, and are less likely to seek care for concerning symptoms. This ultimately, can lead to delayed diagnoses and, overall, poorer states of health.
For these individuals, simply seeing an relevant ad that says “You might have X, talk to your doctor” could be the start of a lifesaving patient journey. Removing or drastically restricting DTC would remove an accessible channel of health information, missing an opportunity for impact.
Clarity, accountability, and impact
Critics often argue that DTC ads can downplay risks while exaggerating benefits — a valid concern that deserves attention. That’s precisely why the FDA’s “clear, conspicuous, and neutral” (CCN) broadcast standard emphasizes presenting key risks in a straightforward way.
Under this rule, DTC ads in television and radio formats must present the “major statement” — the key side effects and contraindications — in consumer-friendly language, in both written and spoken form with clear audio quality, and without distractions. That means the risk segment cannot be obscured by upbeat music, fast cuts, or visual clutter.
This approach helps patients absorb the most important safety information before being directed to full labeling for more detail. However, the FDA’s latest news releases indicate that the agency plans to amend existing regulatory requirements for broadcast advertisements to provide information related to side effects and contraindications. If policymakers want to build on this progress, there’s room for practical reforms that strengthen accountability while preserving the awareness benefits of DTC:
- Require advertisers and health plans to measure real-world impact: did an ad campaign lead to new brand starts? Did it reduce delays to care? These metrics should inform future approvals and guidance.
- Introduce a double-pronged approach to claims: greater enforcement against deceptive claims, and at the same time, incentives for evidence-based/clear/informative messaging.
- Set standards for condition-specific targeting, ensuring advertisements are reaching the right people in a privacy-centric way.
Reform should modernize — not muzzle — how pharma communicates with patients. The future of DTC advertising lies in precision and accountability: reaching the right audiences with the right information, while validating impact through real-world evidence. With advanced analytics and privacy-first data, advertisers can identify populations most likely to benefit from awareness campaigns and measure what truly matters — appropriate diagnoses, improved adherence, and measurable script lift.
Stripped of controversy, a data-driven, outcomes-focused approach is the clearest path forward. Rather than erasing health communication, policymakers should support innovation that ensures every ad delivers verified value to patients and providers alike. Done right, DTC can be both ethical and effective — empowering patients with knowledge, guiding clinicians with insight, and ultimately driving better health decisions across the system.
Ted Sweetser
Ted Sweetser is a seasoned professional in the advertising and ad tech market and currently serves as the VP, Strategic Advertising Partnerships at PurpleLab. In PurpleLab, Ted has played a crucial role in building and driving the advertising vertical strategy to ensure the company's success within the sales and customer support realm. Now leading a growing team of sales executives concentrating on delivering value to advertising and ad tech, Ted has firmly placed PurpleLab into a market leading position with innovation and continued market expansion.
Ann Phillips
Ann Phillips has more than a decade of experience in healthcare policy specializing in payment and interoperability standards, clinical AI and life sciences in roles spanning government, non-profit and the private sector. Ann is an active member of HL7, she serves on the Policy Advisory Committee and participates in workgroup activities to advance the development, testing and evaluation of health information interoperability standards.
