美女免费一级视频在线观看

Since the election, most policy pundits have predicted a political shakeup that’s every bit as sweeping as Donald Trump’s November victory. The president-elect’s choices for health-related cabinet members have left little doubt as to their intent to upend the status quo, from vaccine policy to the Food and Drug Administration’s regulatory process to a potential ban on TV drug ads. 

What many may not have anticipated was how rapidly that disruption would begin to materialize, or how significantly it may impact the work of medical marketers. To dig into the possibilities, MM+M convened a roundtable composed of senior-level, client-side commercial execs from biopharma companies large and small. 

Their charge: Discuss how industry can set the tone for the kind of direct, clear communication that might be required over the next few years. This illustrious group*, which met in early December, seized the moment. 

Shared here are their most salient tips, which are like navigation waypoints on a roadmap designed to assist marketers in traversing the new landscape. Along with the incoming administration, they’ll need to hit the ground running come January 20. 

* Individual speaker identities are confidential, in keeping with MM+M roundtable rules. 

Reaffirm prevention

Participants said authenticity will be key to help educate and reaffirm the value of preventive health. Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the designated Health and Human Services (HHS) chief, has been associated with amplifying fear and mistrust of vaccines. 

But he isn’t the first, of course. A parade of politicians, podcast hosts and influential figures on television and social media has eroded confidence in the established science behind childhood vaccines. 

These misconceptions gained traction during the COVID-19 pandemic, when many people felt it was inappropriate to put the newer shots on the same pedestal as older childhood ones. As a result, protection rates have plummeted in some populations, and incidence levels of some of these diseases are rising again. 

No one wants to see a measles, polio, diphtheria or tetanus outbreak to be reminded of the value of vaccination. At the same time, people who have justifiable questions about vaccines — or any healthcare procedure concerning themselves or their children — often feel demonized when trying to discuss the safety and efficacy of said procedures or vaccine mandates. 

If RFK Jr. incites these bitter feelings, it could lead to a further reduction in inoculation rates for vaccine-preventable illness. Authentic messaging could be one way to reaffirm vaccines as a pillar of preventive health.

“Authentic storytelling and testimonials are going to be really important as a new regime comes in,” said one attendee. We have to show “what will happen if people don’t vaccinate. What were the times like before polio and measles vaccines, and things of that nature?”

Laugh a little

A related reality with which healthcare marketers must contend is vaccine fatigue. Many people who aren’t necessarily anti-vax are tired of hearing about them. The apathetic consumer — not necessarily the anti-consumer — represents a marketing problem.

During the pandemic, everyone from the White House to the Ad Council launched large-scale public-health education efforts to sway the hesitant. A variety of behavioral health tactics and locations were used. 

The highest relative effect size of any messaging intervention published? That came from ER docs delivering vax info. Another attendee underscored the need to tap HCPs for help crafting messaging, especially when it involves patients with chronic disease who have concerns about how inoculations could impact their conditions or other treatments they may be taking. 

“If pharma can work with [HCPs] to tailor the message to promote vaccines, it probably would be better understood by the public,” this speaker argued.

Different populations should be messaged differently. Still, is it time to try other ways to confront apathy, perhaps even reexamine mass-media strategy? We’ve seen plenty of those “Don’t miss your daughter’s wedding because of the flu” commercials.

Introducing a serious statement after a humorous one is a tried-and-true communications tool. Car insurance companies, another speaker pointed out, have seen success in using humor to challenge consumer complacency in ways that don’t denigrate anyone. 

“They’ve created situations [in ads] where you don’t feel like, ‘Uh, I don’t need insurance,’” this person continued. “Now you know you need it, and you’ve got to figure out which one. How do we get to that point with vaccination to [make people] say, ‘This is just going to make my life better in a lot of ways,’ in ways we haven’t done it before?”

Don’t be shy

As marketers look for ways to instill trust in health institutions, they shouldn’t overlook their own. After all, if the pharma industry isn’t willing to step up and be the authority on its own products, then who will? 

“I don’t know the ins and outs of all these [cabinet appointees] and their positions,” acknowledged one brand manager. “But what’s scary to me is that they have embraced bad science in certain cases. Is there going to be bad science that is publicized or recommended for people?”

“That, to me, is a public health problem,” this person continued. “The pharma and biotech companies need to have good science behind their products. But the public health issue about misinformation is concerning to me.”

As to who will tamp down on it, “Academic institutions may also start to message more,” said another exec. “It’s more collective versus on the shoulders of pharma.”

Whether such efforts will lead to a bump in marketing spend as companies issue more proactive product messaging is an open question. But recent FDA regulation has made that easier in some contexts, such as the newly issued guidance which equips makers of drugs and medical devices with a host of corrective tools for addressing misinformation appearing on social media.

Band together

On the other hand, if there’s a push to ban pharma advertising — as RFK Jr. has threatened to pursue — it may have a chilling effect. A ban would likely trigger a slew of legal challenges and injunctions. 

Nevertheless, companies may want to consider how to reassert their own value in this area, too. A unifying, digestible message may stand a better chance of convincing the public and lawmakers than multiple one-off efforts.

“I don’t think that more money solves the problem,” agreed another participant. “A collective effort might actually be more effective to say, ‘This is the voice of the research-based industry, and these are the standards we uphold. And you should have trust in that, because look at the advances we’ve delivered.’”

Otherwise, this person added, “If you’re ‘n of 1’ in the marketplace with a limited budget to try and solve the public health messaging that’s going on, you’re going to get blown in the wind.”

Find common cause

While threats made prior to taking office don’t always come to fruition, in this case they serve a strategic purpose, continued this participant. Recalling how Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau flew down to Mar-a-Lago shortly after Trump posted on his social media platform Truth Social about slapping U.S. neighbors with tariffs, the speaker noted, “What I learned in this election was people want significant change. How do you drive that discussion? You start with threats.” 

Pharma, thus, may do well to read the recent saber-rattling as more than empty posturing. 

As the attendee suggested, “If the industry approached it [proactively] and said, ‘Look, you really want to make some drastic changes. We’d like to discuss those with you,’ that would be an open-minded approach to address their talk track, as opposed to digging in and entrenching and defending. Lean into the conversation and try and find a couple of common-ground areas that you could say, ‘We’ve changed.’”

One such area is “clinical research as a care option,” suggested another speaker. That is, by highlighting the amount of resources that pharma companies devote toward preventative, longitudinal studies. 

“That could be messaged a lot more,” noted the marketer, who said their company is running a number of such studies.

Indeed, with RFK Jr. promising to more closely examine the cause behind chronic illnesses, the industry may want to talk more about its funding for preventive research.

The protocols for these studies include “a lot of things which I would put into the preventative, holistic, wellness area,” said the speaker. “Pharma has a lot of influence. It has a lot of money. And certainly, at least at this point in time, leveraging that could be helpful.”