Good... There a few more I would like to see pulled while they are at it...

Cathie

Why is prescription drug advertising allowed anyway? This isn't a free speech issue because public welfare is so clearly harmed by these ads, as it was with the old tobacco and whiskey ads.

I smell the stink of monetary and ethical corruption every time a drug ad comes on TV, radio, or print media. Big pharm, the ad industry, and the media owners, aided and abetted by our corrupt political system, is driven by greed, cynicism, and public ignorance.

BTW, I hate getting angry like this. It makes my PN hurt more. Now I've got to let it go and play with my puppy.

more bad news....
 

Imagine this: You take a drug and it harms you forever..or kills your husband, or child.

Imagine this...the government protecting the drug companies from your
seeking redress:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/26/wa...rssnyt&emc=rss
Already the drug industry is running amok, with drugs that are more problematic than helpful.

The Justice's use of the word CURE is also alarming..as there are few cures today. Antibiotics may cure...but I don't know many other drugs that cure anything. Seems his use of "cure" is premature.

The drug industry is really pushing for this protection... when the statin takers develop long term damage...it will be the
biggest liability ever. And with the patents expired, the original holders will be holding a very heavy bag.Right now the Zyprexa one is huge.

I'll go over to Cafepharma today... see what the Pfizer reps have to say. I'll bring back anything "good" sans the obscenities they like to throw around there ;)

In any event patients are going to have to become more aggressive, and research their own treatments, if this protection occurs.

David,
I'm confused as to why you are saying that the public welfare is harmed?
I'm no advocate for big pharm, just the opposite. I find these ads disgusting irritants, especially the Erectile Dysfunction ones- but these ads merely generate asking a doc if s/he thinks the Rx would help. Its necessary to get a doc to write an Rx for the advertised drugs. Ya can't just go out and try 'em on your own.
True, the tobacco ads were banned years ago, but DeSaronno liquer, Stolichnaya vodka, and Jack Daniels bourbon - are still putting their ads on TV every nite in my neck of the woods.
(With 'Drink Responsibly' in small print at the bottom- of the last 2 sec., or less.)

It puts pressure on doctors to prescribe these drugs that people see on tv and think that they need. Doctors have told me that they lose patients who go to other doctors who will prescribe it, when they try to tell them that they dont need it or need something else. The ads are creating a demand when there may not be a need. That may be ok for selling soda but not medicine, it affects all of us.

Really?
They must not have had any faith or good communication with thier doctors in the first place.
I trust my docs. If I ask and they say that I'm not in that category and
don't need something, I trust their judgment.
I have faith and trust regarding our relationship.
I pity those that will go doc shopping on those grounds, and for such a
petty reason ....... from a TV ad.
I think those doctors are better off not having such patients.

I know, as a businessman for over 30 years, that depends on
long-term, repeat clients, that I really don't want the customer who is
always just looking for the cheapest price -:eek:
a one-shot sale and he'll go to someone else, as soon as he can get
a cheaper price.:rolleyes:
I won't turn him away, but I can usually identify him for what he is, very quickly.:wink:
Customer loyalty is the base of my business. :)
If a customer doesn't trust me to serve his best interests on a long term basis,
he's just a 'flash in the pan' and usually turns out to be a problem
and a headache, anyway.:confused:
I don't need to deal with that on a regular basis - causes ulcers.:(

What you have said makes sense to me as to how to run a business successfuly.

The advertising must create substantial revenue for the drug companies or else there would not be so many advertisements. Apparantly many people are requesting this drug or that and are being prescribed it.

Im sure this court with its makeup will be deciding to prohibit law suits against drug manufacturers. Drugs will be put on the market after short preordained trials, approved by the fda, and then you will have no recourse when it turns out its harmful long term. Drug companies have had such stellar records in the past and have proved themselves to have the interest of the patient as its primary concern, why should you need to have recourse? (being sarcastic). Doctors will be appealing to the supreme court to set precedent in the near future also.

The drug companies claim that they use their big profits for research, but the bulk of the excess profits goes toward advertising. Advertising includes treating doctors and their families to "workshops" in Hawaii.

The responsibility of congress to regulate commerce for the public good is clearly stated in Section 8 of our constitution, "The Congress shall have Power...To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes." I'd start by taking drug approval testing out of the hands of the drug companies that would profit by sale of those drugs, and make drug testing the responsibility of the US Dept. of Standards. I'd continue allowing drug advertising to the medical profession, but not the general public, which hasn't the background or access to full information to make informed choices in using such potentially dangerous products.

We need a balance between private profit and the public welfare. This is one area where things are way out of balance, with the foxes in charge of the hen house. This certainly had direct impact on those of use with chronic health problems.