AUTH/1812/3/06: Pfizer v Bayer — SortEDin10 campaign and BBC celebrity interview promoted Levitra to the public | PMCPA Case

📊

Key facts

⌄

Case number	AUTH/1812/3/06
Parties	Pfizer v Bayer
Campaign	SortEDin10 (ED disease awareness/education)
Material at issue	BBC News website interview with sporting celebrity spokesperson
Main issue	Public statements naming Viagra/Cialis/Levitra and implying Levitra’s fast effect; encouragement to seek prescription; disparagement of Viagra
Applicable Code year	2003
Complaint received	13 March 2006 (also stated as 14 March 2006 in the report text)
Case completed	02 May 2006 (also stated as 3 May 2006 in the report text)
Appeal	No appeal
Breach clauses	8.1, 20.1, 20.2
Sanctions	Undertaking received; additional sanctions not stated

Reviewed by Dr Anzal Qurbain (FFPM) — ABPI Final Signatory

🤖

Got a question about this case?

Ask one of our 13 specialist ABPI advisors — instant answers, 24/7.

Ask AskAnzal AI

🎬 Expert Video Walkthrough

🎬

Video walkthrough — coming for members

Subscribe now and get expert video analysis for every case as we publish them.

Subscribe — from £299/yr

📋

⌄

Pfizer complained about a Bayer-sponsored erectile dysfunction (ED) disease awareness/education campaign, SortEDin10.
The issue was a BBC News website interview with a sporting celebrity who was the campaign’s primary spokesperson.
In the interview, the celebrity said: “The impotence drug Viagra did not help me… Cialis did not have very quick results, but… Levitra suited my lifestyle… within 15 minutes I could be in action…”.
Pfizer alleged this promoted Levitra (a prescription-only medicine) to the public and encouraged patients to ask their doctor to prescribe it.
Pfizer also alleged the comments disparaged Viagra by implying it did not work effectively and was inferior.
Bayer argued the transcript was on the BBC site (not the campaign site), that it had no editorial control, and that the remark reflected personal experience.
The Panel reviewed the briefing materials that prompted the BBC article and noted the celebrity was a known Levitra patient and had been briefed to talk about his treatment/personal experience.

⚖️

⌄

The Panel ruled Bayer was responsible under the Code for the celebrity’s statements because it briefed him and facilitated the interview.
The Panel ruled the BBC interview in effect advertised Levitra to the public.
The Panel ruled the “Viagra did not help me” statement lacked balance and disparaged Viagra.
Breach rulings: Clauses 8.1, 20.1 and 20.2.
No appeal.

🔒

Members get the complete breakdown — Clauses, Sanction, Signatory Lens, Audit checklist, and 3 Key Questions.

Best value

£249/year

Annual — save £99

£29/mo

Monthly

Join Now — Instant Access