Doctors, broadcasters and pharmaceutical companies are closely watching a court case that could change the way prescription drugs are advertised to the public in Canada.

Currently, TV and magazine ads in Canada can either:

• Mention a drug without making claims about what it does, such as advertising the name of an erectile dysfunction treatment while remaining vague about its purpose.
• Urge consumers to talk to their doctor about treatments for such things as hair loss, without mentioning a specific drug.

CanWest Global Communications, which owns a number of media outlets, claims the current law restricts its freedom of expression under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

In documents filed at Ontario Superior court, CanWest argues the current law is discriminatory and ineffective.

The company said it has been deprived of earning advertising dollars available to media in the U.S., where direct-to-consumer ads giving detailed product information are allowed.

The company also argued the law is pointless, given Canadians watch direct-to-consumer ads on American TV.

Ads may drive up cost of treatment

Doctors see the effects of the ads in their clinics. People frequently ask for expensive new drugs by name, said Dr. Hazem Hamdy, a family physician in Ottawa.

"It really increases the expense of the system," said Hamdy. "We don't have any good reason to give these expensive drugs while the old, cheap drug works."

Prescription drug use has increased in countries where direct-to-consumer ads are used, said Barbara Mintzes, who studies the effects of drug advertising at the Centre for Health Services and Policy at the University of British Columbia.

"This will certainly push those costs up much faster, so just in terms of the sustainability of medicare, there's a real concern."

CanWest would not comment, saying the issue is now before the court.

The federal government is expected to file its response by the end of June.