I choose "I don't know", because I think that laws, which forbid drug advertisements, should be in place worldwide(!). Note that there is a difference between advertisement and information about a drug. For example a site like this one:
provides information about drugs but it doesn't advertise them. (Note that the above website also has a field "toxicity".) In contrast a website with shining, blinking logos (and annoying popup windows) praising their drugs would be a violation of this law and should be punished. For me this kind of proselytizing would be similar to religious indoctrination. I would push for a strict application of this law, because drugs can be dangerous for health. Therefore even a small advertisement of a drug can be regarded as an act of taking away the freedom of a well-informed choice from an individual regarding that individual's health. This means that people below a certain age shouldn't be allowed to take drugs, because they may not yet have the ability to make such a well-informed choice.
I think that any advertisement for any drug including alcohol and all drinks associated with alcohol, tobacco and so on should be completely forbidden. In general I don't see any purpose (other than making money) for advertisements of drugs (like aspirin) on TV or other media. I would strictly forbid that as well. If someone has an illness, (s)he can go to a doctor or a drugstore and ask for help. There is no real need for these advertisements. Anyone making these advertisements should get a few years in prison. I think that the most effective punishment would consist of fines and a lengthy prison term. Also the fines should consist of all the profit someone managed to gain from the advertisements. (One just has to compare a company's current financial status to their financial status before the advertisements, calculate the difference and then confiscate that difference. (The taxpayer would be happy.) After the confiscation of this amount of money the management of the company would then go to trial (and then likely jail) for the crime of 'drug proselytization'.)
I also dislike the idea that other people should pay for someone else's decision to take drugs, which they clearly don't need for medical reasons. What I mean by that is, that at some point such a drug addict will get sick due to his or her addiction. And when that happens this individual should pay for treatment himself or herself. However this rule should only apply if a doctor can prove that an individual got sick due to the abuse of a drug. If something like that cannot be proven beyond doubt then - assuming we are talking about a country, where a social health system is in place - that social health system - and by extension the taxpayers - should still pay for a treatment of that individual's illness.
The only remaining question is, how to handle "negative advertisements" of a drug. For example someone may post a website, which would write in big red letters that certain drugs like heroin are horrible, dangerous, evil and so on. I'm not sure whether or not this should be prosecuted as well. Basically this would take away someone's freedom to make a well-informed choice as well. Essentially it boils down to the question
What is more important someone's
'freedom to make a well-informed choice'
regarding your own health *free* from subjective outside influence or the
'freedom of speech' ?
I think that if someone can prove beyond doubt that the individual, who posted these negative views on drugs, doesn't really profit from postings these views. (For example by making money from these negative views.) Then the freedom of speech is more important than the freedom to make an unbiased well-informed choice. But if it can be proven that an individual makes money or profits in another way from posting these negative (or positive !! ) views about drugs then in this instance the 'freedom of choice' weights more than the 'freedom of speech'.
Well, this is, how the law in my reality would look like. I wouldn't forbid drugs but I would ensure that nobody stumbles into drug addiction without knowing what (s)he is doing. But if someone wants to be a drug addict, then who am I to stop her or him?