The Mindful Migraine

A few weeks ago, I did a post labelled ‘migraines as advertised’ that showed several (not great) migraine medication ads from decades ago.  Seconds after I hit ‘publish’ I noticed an article about a ‘controversial’ Lady Gaga ad for migraine medication.  Lady Gaga is well known for her singing and acting.  What you may not know is that she also apparently gets migraines and suffers from fibromyalgia.  Safe to say she has her fair share of pain days.  I tried to untangle the online commentary to figure out what was the ‘problem’ with her ad – the fact that she’s admitting she suffers from migraines or her endorsing medication – or both.

In June 2023, Lady Gaga posted an Instagram photo to her 56 million followers, which showed her performing at a concert, with a text-overlay which referenced the medication Nurtec.  Not a name I’m familiar with in Australia, it turns out to be one of the new CGRP medications (calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor blockers) which can be used as an acute medication or as a preventative for migraines. 

The post includes her recommendation as well as additional slides with safety information, and a clear acknowledgement that it was a paid endorsement.

Here’s her Instagram post: Lady Gaga (@ladygaga) • Instagram

Based on the comments I read beside the post, and replicated online to make the mountain of ‘news’ articles, people found her ad “embarrassing”, “cringey”, “ridiculous” even “pathetic”.  They were disappointed that she “sold out” for a “cash grab” when she teamed up with ‘big pharma’, and that advertising health for wealth was shameful.  Others were critical of the timing, given that it was in Pride Month (and apparently talking about medical conditions during that month was potentially homophobic).  Some accused her of lacking integrity, implied it was a prank, or suggested her account had been hacked.  One poster labelled her a “drug-pusher” and several worried about impressionable children reaching for medicines endorsed by celebrities.  A couple of repliers noted that similar ads would be illegal in Australia and the UK (which I can’t confirm).  One comment referred to her as “pushing poison” and another said ALL medicine was poison. 

The fact that the Nurtec parent company was Pfizer was apparently also an issue, given they “take more than they give”, had supposedly profiteered from Covid, and were apparently paying huge fines for alleged marketing fraud regarding arthritis medication.  Again – I can’t confirm or deny any of these allegations.

There were a handful of those who supported the singer, noting she has always been vocal about her chronic pain, and she had a right to publicise what worked for her in the hope of helping others.  Some noted that she sells makeup for Sephora, so why not pain medication since “migraines are real”?  One lonely writer congratulated her on finding a solution, while lamenting CGRPs had not worked for her and she was still looking for migraine assistance.

It’s hard to get a reliable take on the issue, particularly since the articles I read were all a regurgitation of people’s replies (just as I did here).  Moreover, those articles generally sat next to other articles about ‘stars who ruined their careers with plastic surgery’ or an abundance of ads for skinny pills and hair loss treatments.  The general vibe around these articles seemed to be ‘pull celebrities down for whatever life choices they’re making’.

I don’t know Lady Gaga well enough to have an opinion.  I’ve hummed along to some of her tunes, I was as bemused as everyone else by her meat-dress, but I had no idea she suffered from migraines.  I don’t really see a problem with a celebrity (or anyone) spruiking a product that works for them, so long as they’re clear that it’s a paid endorsement.  If that makes you suspicious of the product’s worth, that’s ok.  If it makes you suspicious about her worth or her chronic pain, I think you might be reading the wrong message into this.

If I had one complaint, it’s something that no one else seemed to mention: in the video version of the ad, there’s a bright flash in the right-hand corner at the 7 or 8 second mark.  Like a mini flare, it’s exactly what a person with migraine does NOT want to see.  It’s also why I haven’t included a link to the video here – it was actually painful to watch – so if you do choose to seek it out, fair WARNING it is uncomfortable watching, in a literal sense not (only?) a moral sense.

Perhaps that flash might be the problem with it all.  If the ad really was intended to help an “actual patient” as it says over her image, then it missed the mark in not being user friendly.  (If you’ve ever wondered why my blog looks like a boring old phone directory, and why someone with a design background doesn’t use more colors and fancy fonts, it’s because I made a conscious decision to be ‘easy on the eyes’.)  Moreover, if her ad is not suitable to be watched by Team Migraine then maybe there is an element of truth that big pharma’s money speaks louder than her good intentions.

As with so many things like this – it’s best if you make up your own (migraine) mind.

Take care, Linda x