Fw: Consumer groups sue Claritin maker

[Guest guest]

FYI!

MM

----- Original Message ----- From: Myrl Jeffcoat

myrlj@...

Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2001 10:09 PM

Subject: Consumer groups sue Claritin maker

Consumer groups sue Claritin makerSchering-Plough accused of false advertisinghttp://www.msnbc.com/news/611728.aspASSOCIATED PRESSWASHINGTON, Aug. 9 - Several consumer groups filed a lawsuit Thursdayagainst the makers of Claritin, the nation's most widely prescribed allergydrug, alleging ads for the medicine make bold claims of relief that are nottrue.THE PLAINTIFFS said the drug company, Schering-Plough, has boosted its saleswith television, Internet and mailed ads, despite research they contendshows Claritin works only 50 percent of the time.Schering-Plough denied the claims, retorting that no amount of advertisingcould sustain a drug that does not work.The Prescription Access Litigation project, a Boston-based consumer group,is the lead plaintiff in the lawsuit. The group did not ask for a specificamount in damages."This is not a mere oversight," said Rosenfeld, a spokesman for thegroup. "We believe Schering-Plough has deliberately left out informationabout the drug's efficacy, instead serving up glowing ads to push thisproduct in America's living rooms. The ads are misleading and designed tofool the public into paying top dollar for a drug that often as not, justdoesn't work."The lawsuit cites studies performed or requisitioned by Schering-Plough thatRosenfeld says prove Claritin works only half the time. Yet,Schering-Plough's ads make "numerous statements of unqualified and absoluteeffectiveness and no mention of the limited usefulness of Claritinproducts," the lawsuit states.Schering-Plough officials said any claims that the company's advertisementsbreak the law are false, but would not comment on the research."All advertisements are under regulation established by the Food and DrugAdministration," said Foy, a spokeswoman for Schering-Plough."Claritin remains the nation's leading allergy drug because it works. Nodrug could remain this popular if it did not work, nor would physiciansprescribe such a drug."Consumer groups have long accused the drug industry of makingunsubstantiated claims in direct-to-consumer advertisements. Sobol,an attorney representing the consumer groups suing Schering-Plough, says thesuit is not a shot against the practice of aiming advertisements atconsumers."We understand that the law allows these types of ads," Sobol said. "Butwhen these ads blatantly trick the public into spending money on somethingthat is no more effective than a sugar pill, that is unfair."Other plaintiffs include Citizen Action New York, Citizen Action NewJersey, Health Action New Mexico and several individuals who used the drug.