The UK government is to investigate claims that a children's book on allergies was used by a major drugs company to promote a drug to children. Moreover, the drug it promoted is no longer the first choice in treatment for childhood allergies.
GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) commissioned the book, Mr Sneeze and his Allergies, which was produced in collaboration with the charity Allergy UK. Mr Sneeze is allergic to the feathers in his pillow. At the end of the book are four pages of allergy advice from Allergy UK and two pages from GSK advertising its over the counter products Piriton and Piriteze.
The book had been approved by the Proprietary Association of Great Britain, the trade association that represents the manufacturers of over the counter medicines. Members agree to abide by its code of practice, which reflects the 1994 Medicines Act, which prohibits the direct advertising of any drugs to children.
After a report in the Guardian newspaper, however, the book is now being investigated by the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency, which regulates the advertising and promotion of medicines in the United Kingdom.
To add to the controversy, the drugs Piriton and Piriteze are not even first choice paediatric antihistamines, according to Dr Andrew Herxheimer, emeritus fellow of the UK Cochrane Centre.
“They are not at all the first choice because they cause sedation. Parents are not told in this book that there are newer and better ones. GSK does not make any of the newer non-sedating antihistamines,” he said.
“This book is mis-education: an anti-educational move. It is a symptom of something more sinister. This is advertising masquerading as information and education,” continued Dr Herxheimer. “The Proprietary Association of Great Britain are very proud of their regulatory system, but in this case it has failed. Following rules to the letter is not the same as following their spirit.”
Wendy Garlick, principal policy adviser with the Consumers' Association, also criticises the book: “It goes against all our recommendations on patient information. How can it be educational unless it gives the full overview and information on side effects, instead of just promoting GSK products?”
Muriel Simmons, chief executive of Allergy UK, claimed that the charity had not seen the GSK advertisements before publication. She emphasised that Allergy UK received no money from the collaboration and distanced herself from suggestions of an association with GSK.
“I would have preferred the advertising to be better positioned, possibly a leaflet to go in the book,” she said. “Allergy UK does not support any drug whatsoever. I have never spoken to GSK. We have been dragged into this,” she said.
Alice Hunt, UK communications manager for GSK, insisted the book was an educational resource. “This is a tool for parents,” she said. “We have not received a single complaint.”
Mike Owen, director of communications at the Proprietary Association of Great Britain, stands by the association's decision: “We approved the book on the basis that the target audience is parents.” A letter was sent out with the book recommending that parents remove the advertising section before giving the book to children.