top of page
Search

Did the BBC documentary breach MHRA regulations on advertising and promoting medicines?



Readers of this blog will be aware of the complaints I have submitted to the BBC concerning its documentary Unvaccinated. What I was not aware of was that the programme likely breached regulations governing advertising of prescription medicines.


A group of scientists and clinicians (who have given me permission to reproduce this) have written to the Advertising Standards and Outreach Unit of the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency arguing that the programme was 1) promoting medicinal products as defined in the MHRA Regulations applying to advertisements relating to medicinal products (“The Blue Guide, Advertising and Promotion of Medicines in the UK (Updated 2020)” and 2) failed to comply with the legal requirements for such promotion and advertising.


The full letter of complaint can be read here. It is an extremely comprehensive and carefully written explanation of exactly how the programme was in breach of the legal requirements. The summary says:


Society demands that advertising of any commodity, service or anything that may be of interest to the consumer, should be of a high standard. It should not include anything that could cause serious or widespread offence, create unrealistic expectations in the consumer or be misleading. Furthermore, UK law recognises that medicines should not be treated as an ordinary general commodity by placing specific restrictions on them. There is recognition in this approach that potentially vulnerable, sick people and their carers could be affected or even targeted by such promotional activities.


Therefore, over and above the general legislation and controls on advertising, there is additional specific legislation that applies to the advertising of medicines. All advertising and promotion of medicines, both for self-medication and to healthcare professionals where medical prescription is required, must be responsible and of the highest standard. All means and media used in the promotional marketing of medicines are subject to the legislation controlling advertising. This includes academics, journalists and broadcast media.


The television programme “Unvaccinated” broadcast by the BBC and still available on its iPlayer streaming service meets the definition of an advertisement for a medicinal product as set out in the Advertising Regulations. As such it is therefore in breach of these regulations as it is promoting specific POMs to the general public. It also fails to meet the required quality standards for the advertising of medicinal products as set out in these regulations as, on a number of counts, it fails to encourage the rational use of the products by presenting them objectively and without exaggerating their qualities, it is misleading and it also describes them as “safe”.


We would be grateful if you would take the necessary steps to ensure that these breaches of the UK legislation are dealt with appropriately.



Although the documentary cites some covid-19 vaccines by name, I consider that this is done in a factual and informative way throughout without highlighting particular qualities of a medicine (ie, without use of any product claims)


It asserted that the Programme fell outside the scope of the definition for an advertisement for a particular medicine as defined in the (MHRA) Regulations and advised the letter signatories to refer their concerns to the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA):


I am therefore of the view that a programme that investigates and reports on attitudes and behaviours of members of the UK general public to taking up a public health medical intervention—ie, vaccination—to prevent illness from an infectious disease would not be within scope of the definition for an advertisement for a particular medicine as defined in the Regulations.


The full response (which does not address any of the detailed concerns raised in the letter) can be found here.


1,449 views5 comments

5 Comments


Is there any way to challenge the response from the MHRA?

Like
Norman Fenton
Norman Fenton
Sep 18, 2022
Replying to

We have challenged it and are waiting for a response

Like

Adriaan de Haan
Adriaan de Haan
Sep 01, 2022

So this opens the door then, as precedent, for similar promotional programs to be aired about other medicines... It would be great if somebody could do something similar to promote the use of Viagra or something similar. "90% of men use it, let's hear why the 10% crazies don't" - and cite some obscure survey of men with erectile disfunction to "prove" the percentages. Make lots of claims about how great "erectile disfunction" pills are, mention that Viagra is one but never recommend it directly - there you go.

Like
Berry Ruby
Berry Ruby
Sep 01, 2022
Replying to

Yup, good point. But remember Viagra was in fact the result of [maybe not so] adverse reaction, in itself: https://blog.weaccuse.org/pfizer-viagra-and-the-history-of-clinical-trials/

Like

Berry Ruby
Berry Ruby
Aug 30, 2022

Good points made. NZ & USA are the only two countries which allow blatant unrestricted adverts of medicines. Trouble is, those laws were made when none of us realised regulatory agencies like the MHRA were majority funded by BigPharma. So in reality, it looks like the U.K. legislation is utterly meaningless.

Like
bottom of page