NAD: Bayer Healthcare ad claims for Aleve are supported
NEW YORK The National Advertising Division of the Council of Better Business Bureaus on Thursday determined that Bayer Healthcare can substantiate claims made in packaging, television, print and Internet advertising for Aleve and Aleve Liquid Gels products.
Claims at issue included:
- “minimum daily dosing” and “minimum label dosing”;
- “all day pain-free movement” and “stop pain all day”; and
- “Only two Aleve can stop pain all day” and “that would take twice as many Advil.”
NAD, the advertising industry’s self-regulatory forum, reviewed the claims at issue, following a challenge by Wyeth Consumer Healthcare, manufacturer of Advil, a competing analgesic.
Wyeth also challenged a pill-count comparison graph that two Aleve caplets stacked next to four Advil caplets, with the claim “Just 2 Aleve = 4 Advil.”
NAD noted in its decision that Bayer has, since at least 2002, made a pill-count comparison in its advertising, including the recent claim that two Aleve capsules equal four Advil capsules. The advertiser maintained, and NAD accepted, that the pill count comparison is based on the respective FDA-approved labels for Aleve and Advil.
Consistent with past decisions, NAD accepted product labels, approved by the Food and Drug Administration as reasonable support for the durational capacity of Aleve and Advil.
NAD determined that the advertiser provided a reasonable basis for its “pain-free” claim, based on its FDA-approved label. Further, NAD determined that it was unlikely that consumers who use over-the-counter analgesics would expect to experience a complete absence of any pain. The NAD also found that the advertiser established a reasonable basis for its value calculator, based on a minimum daily dose of two Aleve pills versus four Advil tablets.
Study finds spinosad more effective than permethrin in treating head lice
CARMEL, Ind. ParaPRO on Wednesday announced the results of two phase 3 clinical studies published online this month in the journal Pediatrics, which concluded that a spinosad suspension was significantly more effective in eliminating head lice (pediculosis capitis) than permethrin. Permethrin, which is marketed under the brand name Nix (marketed by Insight Pharmaceuticals and available over the counter), is the American Academy of Pediatrics’ recommended first-line medication for head lice.
The studies, in which the participants used the products at home, unsupervised, demonstrated that 0.9% spinosad was significantly more effective than 1% permethrin lice treatment in eliminating head lice. The majority of spinosad-treated participants were lice-free after only one application. In addition, treatment with spinosad did not require the combing of nits, in contrast to the comparator treatment permethrin (which was used according to its label instructions and required nit removal by combing).
“This is significant because convenience and compliance are important issues in treating and getting rid of head lice,” stated Dow Stough, Burke Pharmaceutical Research and an investigator in the studies.
Both the spinosad and permethrin treatments were well tolerated with few adverse events reported.
Results of these and other studies have been submitted to the Food and Drug Administration for approval to market spinosad suspension as a prescription product. ParaPRO is seeking approval to market the product under the name NatrOVA.
ParaPRO licensed spinosad from Eli Lilly and Co. in 2002 for the treatment of head lice. Since then, ParaPRO has developed a proprietary formulation and tested the product and is currently awaiting FDA review.
Kaiser Health Tracking poll finds Americans struggle with health care
MENLO PARK, Calif. While politicians debate healthcare reform on Capitol Hill, the everyday American visiting the pharmacy on the corner of Main and Main is still struggling with health care, according to the latest Kaiser Health Tracking Poll released Tuesday.
One-third of Americans say they or someone in their household has had problems paying medical bills over the past year. That is up 900 basis from August and represents the highest level this measure has reached in nearly a year.
The proportion who report difficulty meeting their medical expenses is substantially higher among certain demographic groups, including: the uninsured (62% have had problems paying medical bills in the past 12 months); those with health problems (55%); those making less than $30,000 per year (47%); African-Americans (46%); and Hispanics (45%).
A majority of Americans (56%) also said they have put off care over the last 12 months because of cost reasons, with many saying that they had relied on home remedies or over-the-counter drugs instead of seeing a doctor (44%), skipped dental care or other checkups (35%) or skipped a recommended medical test or treatment (28%).
So Americans are tuning into the healthcare reform debate with genuine interest. With regard to tackling healthcare reform, 57% of Americans now believe that the healthcare debate is of utmost importance today, and the proportion of Americans who think their families would be better off if health reform passes is up 600 basis points (42% versus 36% in August), and the percentage who think that the country would be better off is up 800 basis points (to 53% from 45% in August).
The component that draws among the strongest support across the political spectrum is requiring that health insurance companies cover anyone who applies, even if they are sick or have a preexisting condition. Overall, 8-in-10 people support that idea, including 67% of Republicans, 80% of independents and 88% of Democrats.
When it comes to paying for reform, 57% of the public say they would support “having health insurance companies pay a fee based on how much business they have” and 59% would support “having health insurance companies pay a tax for offering very expensive policies.” In both cases, Republicans are evenly divided while Democrats and political independents tilt in favor. The poll did not test arguments for and against the policies.
Some commentators believe that proposals to obtain savings in the Medicare program are driving opposition among seniors. The survey finds that a plurality of seniors (49%) opposed the idea of limiting future increases in Medicare provider payments as a way to help pay for health care reform. But a solid majority (59%) would back the same limits if they were framed as helping to “keep Medicare financially sound in the future.”
People say they would be more likely to support a new reform proposal if they heard it would:
- Improve health care for our children and grandchildren (77%);
- Provide financial help to buy health insurance to those who need it (74%);
- Help ensure the long-term financial health of Medicare (69%);
- Fulfill a moral obligation by ensuring that people don’t have to go without needed health care just because they can’t afford it (68%); and
- Mean that people with a history of illness would not be denied coverage and could get it at the same price as healthier people (65%).
Conversely, people say they would be less likely to support a new reform proposal if they heard that it would:
- Limit choice of doctors (65%);
- Reduce the quality of care provided to seniors under Medicare (63%);
- Result in payment cuts that might make doctors less willing to take Medicare patients (62%);
- Get the government too involved in your personal health care decisions (59%); and
- Increase people’s insurance premiums or other out-of-pocket costs (57%).
The survey was designed and analyzed by public opinion researchers at the Kaiser Family Foundation and was conducted Sept. 11 through Sept. 18, 2009, among a nationally representative random sample of 1,203 adults ages 18 and older. Telephone interviews conducted by landline (801) and cell phone (402, including 147 who had no landline telephone) were carried out in English and Spanish.