In defense of ads for drugs:

New drugs are being developed all the time, and doctors don't make a general practice of calling you up to suggest that you try a new drug.

Theoretically, assuming you go in for regular checkups, your doctor reviews your medical history, and sees what chronic problems you have, and considers whether a new drug might be better for you than one you're already taking. But a lot of doctors don't do that. They have the attitude "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" and if you don't complain about your existing regimen, it "ain't broke."

But you tend not to complain or ask questions unless you already have an idea that something else might work better.

Consider my father's case: Many, many years ago, he noticed he was going deaf, so he went in for a hearing exam. He was told: sorry, there's nothing we can do for you. He had an unusual type of hearing loss: he was losing sensitivity at the low end of the spectrum, whereas most people lose it at the high end first. So he became resigned to the fact that deafness was something he'd just have to live with. For years afterwards, he never mentioned his deafness to a doctor.

Over the years, improvements were made in the electronics of hearing aids, and they developed types that would amplify low sounds. But my father knew nothing about it. He saw lots of ads on TV for hearing aids, but he ignored them, believing he was a hopeless case. He eventually did get hearing aids—I don't know what provoked him to get a new exam, but he remarked he would have gotten hearing aids years earlier if only he'd known they were available.

Don't you suppose the same thing could happen with drugs?