Miracle drugs or just good advertising?

I feel obligated to preface this post with the confession that I am pretty skeptical of the effectiveness of modern medicine, as anyone who's had the pleasure of being around me while I'm sick can attest to. This skepticism has formed in part from upbringing (I think i swallowed my first pill at age 20) and in part from first and secondhand experience with incompetent doctors and ineffective drugs. I usually find that if you ignore an ailment long enough, or eat a few extra apples, the problem will eventually disappear.

Anyway, one thing that really baffles me about modern medicine is our tolerance for its side effects. I'm sure some of those prescription drugs really do help people treat otherwise debilitating conditions, but don't the side effects caused by many of them seem just as bad (if not worse) as the symptoms they are intended to cure? Like sure, taking "pramipexole" will alleviate my restless leg syndrome, but is it worth the risk of developing an overwhelming compulsion to gamble? (I couldn't make this stuff up).

Exhibit B: My grandma takes medication for her dizziness and vertigo, and one of the listed side effects is.... (drumroll please)... DIZZINESS. Am i missing something here? Exhibit C: A few weeks ago I succumbed to pressure from friends to take something for my persistent allergy-like symptoms and took an over-the-counter Zyrtec (originally available by prescription only). It did appear to somewhat clear up my sinuses, but I was too busy being distracted by my incredibly dry mouth, lightheadedness and inexplicable anxiety to notice the miracle cure. Sure enough, these were listed as possible (rare) side effects of the drug. In my defense, there's a good chance that my proximity to the Chernobyl nuclear accident as a child may have something to do with my body's hypersensitive reaction to drugs. Radiation aside, I'm mainly just wondering--are drug company ad campaigns devised by marketing geniuses, or are we just dumb?

As an advertising professional, one thing that fascinates me about prescription drugs is the way they have chosen to aggressively target consumers directly even though they are at 2 degrees of separation, rather than stick with wooing and educating the medical community that can directly impact the purchase decision. Since consumers can't get their hands on these drugs without a doctor's nod, this customer acquisition strategy is very similar to the way toy companies target young kids in the hope that they will whine and annoy their parents until they get what they want. "Ask your doctor if Zaddayaddastorxil is right for you." Genius call-to-action, but in the words of Bill Maher (one of my idols), shouldn't your doctor be telling YOU what's right for you, not the other way around? If you're telling your doctor what drugs you want, at that point, isn't he just a drug dealer? Good times.

Another thing that irks me is the hypocrisy/free ride given to these drug companies in advertising. Why is it perfectly socially acceptable to air a Cialis or Viagra commercial during primetime--two drugs that treat penile dysfunction and basically advertise sex in a jar--but when a wardrobe malfunction at the Superbowl exposes part of a woman's breast for a nanosecond, the FCC and half the country goes apeshit over it. Doesn't a wardrobe malfunction also potentially assist with penile arousal? I guess if the drug companies can't profit from it, it's not allowed. Anyway, that's all I have to say about that.