Read this passage from a rhetorical text. Among many serious problems currently afflicting the US healthcare system, the direct-to-consumer advertising of prescription drugs may seem like a harmless practice. Yet there are good reasons to be wary of allowing drug manufacturers to pitch their products directly to consumers. In fact, the American Medical Association was so concerned about misinformation that it called for a ban on these ads. Yet the ads continue today. The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) does require drug ads to meet certain criteria including disclosing a brief summary of the risks associated with taking a drug, but the government must go further and ban such advertisements altogether. The safety of American consumers is at stake.

The drug industry insists that drug ads keep patients informed about their treatment options. One industry group, Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, says that direct marketing "encourages patients to visit their doctors’ offices for important doctor-patient conversations about health care that might not otherwise take place.” It is true that it is important for patients to discuss their treatment options with their doctors. However, doctors do not agree that drug ads facilitate these conversations. In fact, many are upset by ill-informed patients who demand new or expensive drugs, even when those drugs may not be the best or safest choice.

What counterargument is made to the claim that direct-to-consumer ads should be banned?

There are good reasons to be wary of allowing direct-to-consumer drug ads.
The FDA regulates direct-to-consumer drug marketing by having requirements for ads.
Direct-to-consumer drug ads keep patients informed and encourage doctor-patient communication.
Doctors believe direct-to-consumer drug ads encourage demands for drugs that are not needed.