Newsvine
  • Welcome
  • Help
  • Report Bug
  • Conversation Tracker
  • Your Column
  • Replies
  • Friends
Type Comments Since You Last CheckedArticle Source Last Checked Stop Tracking All Clear Tracking All
Advertise | AdChoices
Log In | Register
Close the Login Panel
Existing users log in below. New users please register for a free account.

New Users:

Existing Users:

E-Mail:
Password:
Forgot Password?
Please enter the e-mail address or domain name you registered with:
E-Mail/Domain:
Back to Login
Log Out
  • Top News
  • Local News
  • World
  • U.S.
  • Sports
  • Politics
  • Tech
  • Entertainment
  • Science
  • Business
  • Health
  • Odd News
  • More
    • Arts
    • Education
    • Environment
    • Fashion
    • History
    • Home & Garden
    • Not News
    • Religion
    • Travel
Visit LeZi's column >>

LEZI

I consider myself a Conservative Leftist
Articles Posted: 13  Links Seeded: 28
Member Since: 1/2011  Last Seen: 5/15/2012

What is Newsvine?

Updated continuously by citizens like you, Newsvine is an instant reflection of what the world is talking about at any given moment.

Get a Free Account
Help
Fun Stuff
  • Your Clippings
  • Leaderboard
  • E-Mail Alerts
  • Top of the Vine
  • Newsvine Live
  • Newsvine Archives
  • The Greenhouse
  • Recommended Articles
  • Wall of Vineness
Put a Seed Newsvine link on your own site

The Media is the Message: TV Ads for Prescription Drugs.

Sun Apr 10, 2011 4:58 PM EDT
media, drug, fda, health, message, regulation, spin, big-government, deceptive-advertising, health-industry, media-message
By LeZi
Advertise | AdChoices

Just a short article to show a hidden manipulation concept used to sell a product by creating a demand by less than ethical means.

TV Ads, we all have seen them. Prescription drugs for sale. Who will buy! We have drugs to keep you sexually active, we have something for that "sad" feeling. Can't control your bathroom habits? Step right up! I will give you what you need.

The traveling medicine man is not a new concept. It has been around for quite a while. The old medicine man had some oils, home remedies and of course snake oil. Which is now back on the market for pain, but not on TV, From the wagon, he would use his wagon as a forum talk about aliments and then he would sell you something to take care of it.

Today, the wagon has been replaced by our television sets. Prescription drugs, formerly only talked about by the doctor is being sold on the TV. You still need a prescription, but Madison Avenue will sell you on it and you will then go to a doctor to get the prescription. So what is wrong with this? Well nothing. Well, almost nothing.

If you don't have the ailment, there is no sale. Who will buy something that they don't need? Well, no one. At least not so many. Some will buy anything that is for sale, but that is not enough of a market. So what can be done.

In the beginning of the ad, the real work of selling begins. The description of the problem. I will use one that I saw today to illustrate. There is a woman depicted that is "sad". She is asked, "Are you sad? Is it hard to get through your day? Can you carry on sometimes but other times you just feel too sad to go on?"

Well, who hasn't felt sad every so often. Many times because there is a reason to be sad. Husband lost his job, bills are piling up, who would not be sad. There are many reasons that someone is sad. These are not mentinedin the ad, however, you are only asked if you are sad. Sad for a few days? Well, sometimes. Then YOU might be DEPRESSED! But don't be sad about being clinically depressed! We have a drug for that!

If it is not obvious what has happened, the ad is not selling the drug, the ad is selling the condition. The ad is designed to suggest that you suffer from depression. Depressed people are sad so if you are sad, you are depressed is the Message from the Media.

That is the first objective of the advertisement. Suggest that all sad people might be depressed. Then they will also ask if you know someone that is depressed (sad has already been equated with depression) and when a friend suggests that they might be depressed and they have already seen the ad themselves, this reinforcement starts to be rather convincing and now a sad person is even sadder because a friend agrees with the commercial that she is depressed and that is serious.

Now that it is established that if you have a few bad days, you should see the doctor and you really are not going to him for a diagnosis, you have already been diagnosed as depressed, everyone knows it, you only need to get the remedy from the doctor and you know what it is already.

This is the purpose of the ads. To establish the condition, to self diagnose the condition and then to sell their specific product to treat the condition.

The really nice part for the drug companies is that it still sounds like it is a good thing. And each element of their objectives are a good thing if discussed separately. Are some people clinically depressed? Yes. Is being sad one of the symptoms? Yes. Is sadness that only symptom? No. Can the truly depressed person make a good judgment and diagnosis of their depression? NO.

Here is a link to 15 Symptoms as defined By Mayo Clinic staff.

One does not have to have all of these symptoms but usually there will be at least several that are present and there is really no problem unless there is a pattern of these symptoms or if they are severe enough to cause real problems. If you have these problems and you and/or your family are seeing them as a problem in your life, you should see a doctor.

But the drug ads not only don't mention that sadness or unhappiness in itself is not a diagnosis that you are depressed. The drug ads, instead, do rush to the cure! They also suggest with that powerful phrase, "Ask your doctor if XYZ is right for you!"

Some doctors will simply prescribe the drug. If they do, get another doctor. The Mayo Clinic spells out the proper method that a doctor will use to diagnose. The clinic also lists three major diagnostic tools that is needed for a real diagnosis. They are explained in detail at the link "Depression (major depression): Tests and diagnosis"

Real doctors will take something like depression serious but might not go through all the procedures if they know you might be able to see that you are not depressed as he does the physical exam in the office. A doctor that does not know you very well might be convinced that you are depressed. After all, you have been convinced, that is why you are there. Then he has to decide if you need the Laboratory work which might be affected by your insurance, your personal reluctance to have them and just go to an in office Psychological exam himself. He may or not be certified in this area so remember that he is not in his major field of expertise. In this interview, again to eliminate major depression is a lot easier to do than to get a good positive diagnosis. i.e. He might see that you are not depressed, but be convinced, as you are, that you have a real problem and he has another patient waiting on him so why not do what you want and give you a script so see what happens.

This would be the worse case scenario for an honestly interested doctor. If he is "working the line" he might just say, OK, try this and send you on your way. After all, you know the condition and you know the treatment!

The Treatment can be found at the Mayo Clinic - Treatment and drugs site as well. There are numerous drugs to fit specific types of depression and drugs are only one of many treatments that are offered.

So what is the problem. You still need to see a doctor. You still need to get a diagnosis. You still need the doctor to prescribe the drug or other methods of treatment so what is the problem? If you go to the Mayo Clinic, probably not much of a problem. But I don't have that luxury. My current insurance allows me to go to a good university clinic. My alternate coverage offered by my current employer has different places that I have to use. I know of some insurance plans that are even more restrictive on where you can get your health care. Free clinics are used by many people because they don't have insurance at all. All health care providers seem to be overworked, many extremely so, and others just don't have the time to follow ALL the steps.

I switched to the University Clinic after my most respected doctor in the area became too big and started to hire "medical professionals" and they did all the work and he just signed their recommendations for the scripts. With his little network, I could get practically any treatment I wanted if I asked for it. They pretty much took my diagnosis at face value and looked in their PDAs to see if the treatment lined up with my condition and wrote the script. What kind of doctor do you have?

My University Clinic does not have weekend hours and are only open when I work. I have to take off a day just to see them and even so, it is rare that I can get an appointment for "today" or even "tomorrow" even if I am sick. They will sometimes prescribe over the phone but not always. So if I am sick, I go to a community clinic and I have three doctors that I see depending on availability and if I am feeling sick I can see them this afternoon. I use them for regular stuff and go for my yearly check up at the University. A lot of people don't have my options.

They go where they can period. They are very likely to get a doctor that will simply take the approach that its easier to give you what you want and you can tell them if it is working or not and get on to the next patient. THAT is the problem. Even though it is known what should be done, if the patient comes in and knows what they want, they will most likely get it and feel cheated if they don't.

In this case, I am privileged. I have decent health care. I also have more than the average education and life experience. I will be retiring soon and I don't know if I will be able to maintain my freedom and choice in my health care, but that is getting into a different topic.

The drug companies are marketing very powerful drugs by selling the patient on the idea that they need a specific treatment without any regard for the patient's well being. Sure, you can tell the doctor if you are getting better, unless, of course you die first. You can tell him if you are having reactions that make you think that you might commit suicide, unless that reaction to the drug also prevents you from telling him that! These are powerful drugs and depression is a very serious matter. It is dishonest to use very good (I respect their ad writers very much, they are of exceptional quality and really know how to manipulate the public to take their suggestions!) and high tech techniques to merchandise these expensive and often not very well covered If at all.

This has been only about Depression. The big market is of course "sexual enhancement" drugs. In these cases, ask around. All you need to do is ask your doctor and unless you are on death's door he will just write the script. You can even order these on line and they will have a doctor interview you and give you the script. (I have seen the ads and I understand that this is happening in Canada and possibly in the US. Maybe someone can verify this for me). There are also sleeping aids which are addicting drugs, and breathing relief and many urinary problems.

There is nothing wrong with advertising. I love advertising. I have always respect it as an art form. Advertising is media at the highest level. Companies, even drug companies deserve to make money. They do need to be able to pay for future research. They can and do make great discoveries and are an important part of our comfortable and long life span. Their important role in our health and happiness is not to be denied. With this, also comes responsibility. Commercials that exploit people by working to create a market for their products by leading people into false needs for prescriptions is not living up to their responsibility.

I was led into publishing this little editorial by some comments of how the government is somehow too big and is interfering with the proper treatment of health problems by forcing the drug companies to put their disclaimers on their ads. I realize that this is an unreal and untrue opinion but that it is one that is being pushed by some as another example of why government is getting to big! Well, in this era of high tech advertising and psychological manipulation, it might not be a popular job, but someone has to do it. Even with the dreadful backlogs of the FDA the federal government is still better than the myth of big business of any sort living up to the task of self regulation. We need to improve the government's ability to better regulate those things that are important to us and that affect national issues such as health, our welfare and our educational systems. Some aspects of government should be reduced, but regulation is not one of them. This is one of the most important aspects of government in our present time. It may be that in the past, it was not so important. With the businesses being as big as or even bigger than government today, we need someone to help us to find the truth.

This advertising problem is important, but there are some safeguards in place IF the doctors and health care providers can and will do what is deemed proper. Without some government regulation, however, this is not always the case. I have not even touched on the use of spin by some (fortunately only some!) companies that will even resort to "spinning" test results and knowingly put products on the market that are not as safe as they claim. That may be addressed in another article. For now, I am just trying to point out the depth of advertising and how they can use psychological techniques to create the perception of a condition more serious than it really is for the sole purpose of merchandising their drug product.

I hope that this is informative as to the technique and I welcome your comments.

Thank you for reading.

LeZi

  • Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.

Back To Top | Front Page

Published to:

  • LeZi's Column, All of Newsvine
  • Groups: Free Thinkers, Living with Less, Mad For Rachel Maddow, Obama Supporters, ObamaVine, The Anti-Moron League
  • Regions: none
  • Public Discussion (33)
LeZi

Welcome to LeZi's Think Tank.

This is one of a series of articles on the topic of "The Media is the Message" where I try to illustrate various techniques that are used to help shape opinion. Shaping opinion can be a good thing or it can be not so good. I am trying to point out different techniques so that we can learn to spot them when being used so that we can then look deeper into the matter and decide if it is being used to help us or simply to sell a particular agenda.

Please feel free to leave any comment but comments that are concerned with the presentation of the facts or opinion and their merit and problems are even more appreciated.

Thank you for the visit. WHAT DO YOU THINK?

  • 4 votes
Reply#1 - Sun Apr 10, 2011 5:03 PM EDT
rimbauda

Direct To Consumer Prescription Drug Advertising went hand in hand with Medicare Part D Benefits in increasing the demand for drugs.

  • 1 vote
#1.1 - Sun Apr 10, 2011 8:57 PM EDT
LeZi

Is that why? I didn't look up the time table. Do you think that the Part D caused the demand? Or do you think that there was a demand already that led to the new insurance policy that helped people to be able to afford the drugs that they were already being prescribed? Interesting observation in either case. Thank you for your contribution of a good topic for discussion in LeZi's Think Tank! Lets get the ball rolling.

I would think that Part D would allow for more prescriptions to be paid for through the insurance premiums paid for Part D insurance. The medical plans that I have seen were pretty high and he actual profit margin of these Prescription drugs are also very high so that the companies involved can easily still make money by discounting prices on these new drugs to further increase demand for the product and still make a hefty profit to pay for its research as well as in general. Since nothing seems to get done without pressure from lobby groups, I would think that someone would have seen the expanse in marketing possibilities if they could advertise direct to the consumer to make sure that they could find products to spend this new money in the market that was created by the Part D insurance option. I would think that this is not really a coincidence but rather a rather effective marketing strategy on the part of the drug companies.

What do you think?

  • 2 votes
#1.2 - Sun Apr 10, 2011 9:27 PM EDT
rimbauda

Part D enabled doctors to prescribe the drugs their Medicare patients were being marketed on TV. Increasing demand for the drugs would be pointless if the patients were unable to afford them.

  • 2 votes
#1.3 - Mon Apr 11, 2011 11:04 PM EDT
LeZi

Yes, I agree. I just think that it was a coordinated effort by the drug companies to provide both the demand AND the means to pay them. The insurance companies are not loosing money on Plan D as far as I can tell. Its a "win win" for the insurance companies and the drug companies. The customers wind up taking drugs that they don't need and they pay for them with their insurance payments and co-pays. But since the drug companies set the prices along with the insurance companies, they set their own profit margin. What a country!

Am I wrong with this thinking?

  • 2 votes
#1.4 - Mon Apr 11, 2011 11:17 PM EDT
Reply
Danese

They always have a string of serious side effects.

  • 3 votes
Reply#2 - Sun Apr 10, 2011 5:18 PM EDT
LeZi

A long string of serious and dangerous ones. But some say that these are just unnecessary restrictions placed on the drug companies. To me it would be criminal NOT to tell us the potential dangers of these drugs.

  • 4 votes
#2.1 - Sun Apr 10, 2011 6:32 PM EDT
Lisafrequency

I cannot believe anyone would actually risk taking the drugs that death is a side effect. I thought the FDA was supposed to protect health. How can someone want to take something that the side effects are worse than the condition being treated? I guess they aren't listening but the drug co. are sure covering their butts.

My H makes up words for the music they play and every time I hear one of the ads he has made up words for I start laughing...

  • 3 votes
#2.2 - Sun Apr 10, 2011 6:42 PM EDT
Sherry working hard

My favorite side effect is "anal leakage"

  • 2 votes
#2.3 - Sun Apr 10, 2011 7:32 PM EDT
LeZi

Lisafrequency

I cannot believe anyone would actually risk taking the drugs that death is a side effect. I thought the FDA was supposed to protect health. How can someone want to take something that the side effects are worse than the condition being treated?

That is about all that the FDA can do. They can only make them list the contraindications. They are criticized for doing even that. This is what is meant by the people advocating the abolishing of Big Government. This is the regulations that they want to deregulate!

I can see by these responses that this is the main thing that keep them from fooling "most of the people most of the time." If they did not have to contend with the contraindications, they would have a much better shot at getting more people convinced that they need the drug! Downsizing the FDA would cut money off the budget, but then again, who wold be protecting us then? The drug companies?

  • 2 votes
#2.4 - Sun Apr 10, 2011 7:54 PM EDT
LeZi

Sherry working hard

My favorite side effect is "anal leakage"

I can't decide which is more of a deterrent to taking the drug.

Death or "anal leakage." That could be a difficult choice! (depending on what was leaking!)

  • 2 votes
#2.5 - Sun Apr 10, 2011 8:03 PM EDT
Sherry working hard

I do not know why they just don't say "your ass will leak @!$%# uncontrollably" I would not take a drug that siad that EEWWW. I am a victim of side effects, my doc figured it out when I could not walk after taking Levequin, 19 months later after the demage I almost had to have a total hip and will still have to in the future. Its like seriously why would anyone take some of those medicines when it spouts all those horrible side effects, a lot worse then what your initial problem was.

  • 3 votes
#2.6 - Sun Apr 10, 2011 8:12 PM EDT
LeZi

Sherry working hard-

Sorry to hear of your horrible experience! I hope that my making light of the phrase did not offend you. I certainly didn't mean anything by it. I did not know of your experience with it.

Levequin is an extremely powerful drug used to treat some really dangerous aliments. It is also a very big money maker for the drug companies. It is also has sever side effects including a deadly skin disease and tendon damage. This is a link to a site that has some information about both the side effects as well as some information about some law suits against the manufacturers. I don't know about your "hip" problems but they might be related to the tendon side effect and the lawsuits related to that. This is the link.:

Levaquin Side Effects May Result In Stevens Johnson Syndrome Lawsuits

If you have not checked on possible legal action you should really check this out. It also talks about a lot of other aspects of this controversial drug. Let me know if you need any research help. I will do what I can. I don't know why you were taking this drug in the first place but if it was not for something really serious, you are certainly a victim of some shady practices by the drug company.

  • 2 votes
#2.7 - Sun Apr 10, 2011 9:53 PM EDT
Lisafrequency

How can a drug with death as a side effect get approved is what I want to know? The FDA is not protecting the public.

  • 2 votes
#2.8 - Sun Apr 10, 2011 11:18 PM EDT
LeZi

Still another good question.

I think that its possible to have a good drug with that possible side effect but I am not sure at all if it should be a drug that is advertised on TV. Let me explain.

Some cancer drugs are poison. If the chance of curing the cancer is Good and the chance of death from the drug is a scenario that could account for this. I can see no reason, however that would justify advertising that drug!

The same could be true for some drug like Levaquin mentioned by Sherry Working Hard. It is a powerful antibiotic. Some of its uses is to prevent some deadly diseases. It can also cause a deadly skin disease. In certain circumstances, the risk may be justified. But that does not mean that it should be used unless the patient is completely informed of all the risks and agrees to take that risk. I don't think that either of these examples I mentioned should be advertised in any circumstances. But there they are on TV anyway!

I suspect that legally the FDA can't prevent them from advertising these products if they disclaim them. I hope that one of our readers can answer that question. That is a legal question and I don't know the answer. I do know that Levaquin is facing a bunch of lawsuits and they have deep pockets, so there seems to be something happening there. It seems as though they did not make full disclosure someplace along the line. I don't know if they were on TV. I would hope not. But that still doesn't explain the Death Side Effects on the drugs that are on TV.

Can anyone help here?

  • 1 vote
#2.9 - Sun Apr 10, 2011 11:54 PM EDT
Sherry working hard

Hey Lezi no offense is taken! It is so hard to offend me so please no worries =] I am a nurse of 29 yrs. who would have known that when I became septic after a common surgery and placed on that horrible drug it would affect me in such a way. I did not even read the side effects and if I had I would have still taken it, I was so sick I did not care. Now *shrugs* who knows, of course my docs hmm and shrug when we talk about those effects and if that is the "cause" of what happened to me. I even had one say "well you are getting older" I on my soap box can state without doubt that it was that med. I had just returned from Australia and snorkeling the Great Barrier Reef, so age my ass. =] I do know levequin can cause ruptured tendons and ligaments. No one would answer whether it affected cartilege.

  • 2 votes
#2.10 - Mon Apr 11, 2011 5:10 PM EDT
LeZi

I think that you should at least contact a lawyer on that site of someplace if only to see what they say.

As to that "you're getting older Doc, does he have any teeth left! Or did you leave him bent over!

  • 2 votes
#2.11 - Mon Apr 11, 2011 5:52 PM EDT
Reply
Danese

lol:)

we have something for that "sad" feeling.

  • 3 votes
Reply#3 - Sun Apr 10, 2011 5:19 PM EDT
LeZi

Yes, and without deadly side effects either! ;-)

  • 3 votes
#3.1 - Sun Apr 10, 2011 6:36 PM EDT
Reply
mstanley2265

Good article ....The first time I saw an advertisement for a drug telling me to ask my doctor if I needed it. I thought it was hilarious. A person goes to medical school, gets a license to be a doctor and then his patients are told by a TV ad to ask him/her if they need the advertised drug. Wow, that's like your neighbor giving you medical advise when she's a teller at the bank. jeez

  • 2 votes
Reply#4 - Sun Apr 10, 2011 6:07 PM EDT
LeZi

So true! That was one of the things that I thought as well. Then I started to listen more closely and I realized that it was all really secondary to planting the seed that YOU NEED DRUGS to be happy. Yes, they might be very useful drugs, but what are the chances that they are the ones that you need for your condition if you have a condition at all?

When I realized that, spotting the technique just popped out like a beacon in the fog!

  • 3 votes
#4.1 - Sun Apr 10, 2011 7:31 PM EDT
Reply
Dennis Kemmerer

"Ask your doctor if XYZ is right for you!"

That phrase is a marketing tactic to sell some overpriced drug that one likely doesn't need, and I think most people recognize it as such.

However, the ad are particularly effective with older people. That's why the evening network news is saturated with those ads.

  • 2 votes
Reply#5 - Sun Apr 10, 2011 6:46 PM EDT
LeZi

Yes they are a lot in the evening and the older people are one of their major targets! That is one of the disgusting things about this type of advertising.

As people get older, it is common to have things go a little bit off from the way they were when they were younger. It is a difficult time when one has to adjust to being old. They are more susceptible to this type of attack and the drug industry knows it.

They also have a history of buying and using drugs to keep them alive and happy. What's one more drug more or less? And they are used to paying for their drugs more so than a lot of us.

They are also likely to have the conditions that the drugs are designed for. Especially the "sex assistance" drugs. lol, An older friend of mine told me that he thought that he needed Viagra but decided to "look around a bit" first. He said he discovered that he didn't need Viagra, all he needed was another girlfriend!

That is funny, but the sell is to go to the drugs for ED rather than to try to spice up the romance in the relationship first and make sure that it is physical and not just complacency that is causing the problem. With a fresh outlook on life, even old relationships might find that a new approach might make all the difference in the world.

The same is true in all the conditions, but the ED one is just so obvious as to how this marketing technique works. I chose the more serious one of Depression for the example instead. I am still not sure that I made the correct choice. The ED might have been more popular but I thought the Depression was more serious and could have more irreversible bad effects than taking a sex enhancing drug.

  • 2 votes
#5.1 - Sun Apr 10, 2011 7:44 PM EDT
Reply
GEEZER-guy

Advertise over the counter remedies (if you must) but prescription meds--NO. If they budget for advertising, take that $$$ and LOWER the cost for the patients. The ads are so misleading if you only hear what you are expecting. What they really say is usually like cotton candy--you think it is substance, until you take a bite & nothing's there. "Take------ for relief promises nothing. We must view ALL ads for what they created; to sell (only) any other quality is purely a 'side-effect'.

  • 1 vote
Reply#6 - Sun Apr 10, 2011 8:20 PM EDT
LeZi

Another interesting point. OTC medicines are not immune to side effects either and we are very likely to over medicate on these drugs because, after all, they are not regulated at all. Now there is another class with the sudafed drugs that are OTC but you need ID to get them. I think that one can somehow risk being blown up and make Crystal Meth from the ingredients.

Don't misinterpret. I enjoy being able to do most of my own medication. I got used to that freedom living in Asia. Its hard to believe that the same drugs can be purchased over there at maybe 20x cheaper than here! Most can be purchases OTC as well. They still control the Opiates but regular medicine, is pretty much open. The people there don't have TV in most cases and they rely on the pharmacist or "chemist" for medicines they have to buy and of course they use a lot of traditional medicine.

But back to the OTCs here. Aspirin is more powerful than people realize and over medication can have very serious side effects. So can ibuprofen. I have taken a lot more than recommended on many occasions on both of these pain killers with some pain issues that I have. Aspirin can really thin out your blood. Ibuprofen can cause liver and kidney damage. I am happy that I have weaned myself off these with Willow Bark and Arnica. (Wolfbane to any old Lon Cheney Jr. fans) I have no side effects with these.

But, I have spent a lot of time researching my medications when I need to take them. A lot of people don't. They just take them until they feel better. Here, I think that information is the best answer considering the options. Information and a more personal relationship with the pharmacists. I have had many discussions with pharmacists about what is best to take. They are well trained and do not really get the respect that they deserve. In most cases they really know their stuff and are happy to share their knowledge.

The ads are not really useful as you point out. I would not be opposed if they were required to give real information on what their product is and what it does and what to look out for. At least, they should have simple to understand information of what the potential dangers are with the OTCs and what they should look out for when taking the OTCs as well as possible interactions with other OTCs and prescription medicines.

Most advertising of these medicines are directed towards name recognition. I don't see why they could not get this with more "public service" type of informational advertising and get even better name recognition. But this would be difficult to legislate and regulate so the companies would have to do this on their own. So lots of luck!

Hey GEEZER-guy. Good thoughts! Lots of luck on their taking $$$ and kicking it back to us! Maybe that would happen if we were in Congress! Its nice to meet you, I hope that you will hang around the Tank and contribute when you can. Do you have any other thoughts on this or another aspect of this seed?

  • 2 votes
#6.1 - Sun Apr 10, 2011 10:47 PM EDT
Reply
Future History

Aside from the dangerous side effects, the manipulation of Big Pharma, the cost of perscriptions, etc ... what I am really getting sick of, is hearing the word "erection" on television. Is there really anyone in this country that doesn't know what viagra or any of the other penis pills are? Do we really have to be warned about erections lasting over 3 hours while watching television with our kids? What has the world come to when my kids have the image of a 3 hour erection placed in their head by television and radio commercials?

  • 2 votes
Reply#7 - Mon Apr 11, 2011 11:13 AM EDT
LeZi

Ahh, well put. Since my kids are grown, I didn't even think of that. I just block them out for the most part.

As it applies to my topic, the airing of these commercials on TV during "family time" programing (if that aspect of big government has not been removed as well!) is a sign of the drug companies not having any respect the family values you speak of in your post. I agree. I don't know if it is illegal or not, but it certainly is in poor taste to say the least.

Since this is not a newsgroup for children, I hope you won't mind a touch of humor!

I thought that it was a 4hr erection but in either case, if this happened, with the doctors and the usual 2 or 3 day wait for an appointment and the normal wait in emergency rooms, the man might do better, (and cheaper if he doesn't have health insurance!) to fine a "hooker" instead!

You have a very good point and this is just another example of how the industry would "self regulate"!

(if anyone doesn't like the joke, I can delete it. I really do take all this seriously, but in today's climate, one has to take what one can for comic relief.)

  • 2 votes
#7.1 - Mon Apr 11, 2011 11:58 AM EDT
Future History

3 ... 4 ... what's an extra hour of erection amongst friends?! Don't worry about me - my kids are now grown enough to know what the commercials are about, and I already have a sick sense of humor. However, those commercials have been around for many years now, so there was a time when I would routinely change the station just to avoid having my young ones hear that crap.

The pharmaceutical industry is not interested in curing what ails you. All you need to do is read the latest about the hydroxyprogesterone situation to see what Big Pharma really is about.

http://douglassreport.com/2011/04/06/makena/

  • 2 votes
#7.2 - Mon Apr 11, 2011 12:15 PM EDT
LeZi

I don't disagree with you and the article supports what you are saying. I have read the Douglass reports before. I don't have the time right now to look, but can you find another source to corroborate this article? He does seem to have his own agenda's and in the interest of accuracy, he is a source that has presented red flags before.

I am not saying it isn't true, I would only like to have a second or third opinion to make sure that the information is totally true and correct.

I like to do this for all info. In Douglass' case, it is often difficult to tell his info from his ads so I just prefer to double check his sources.

It sounds like it could be true. Unfortunately, I don't now if that would be illegal. Patent laws are somewhat strange. If it can be verified to be true, it might be possible to do something to at least bring this to a more public light. In order to try to do this, it would be especially important to make sure that there was not even a possibility of a problem with the facts. ANY suspicion on the facts could kill any attempts to make this clear to the public in general.

I will try to search later this evening, if you can find something else, please post it here.

  • 2 votes
#7.3 - Mon Apr 11, 2011 12:47 PM EDT
Future History

I know what you are saying - but this one is legit. This has been all over the Washington Post, and John Stewart blew up the story on the Daily Show as well.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/fda-approval-of-drug-to-prevent-preemies-prompts-price-jump-from-10-to-1500/2011/03/04/AFmRo6qB_story.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/pharmaceutical-company-slashes-price-of-preterm-baby-drug-makena/2011/04/01/AFpP9hGC_story.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/fda-approval-of-drug-to-prevent-preemies-prompts-price-jump-from-10-to-1500/2011/03/04/AFmRo6qB_story.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/fda-to-allow-cheaper-preterm-baby-drug/2011/03/30/AFtDrK3B_story.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/pharmacies-can-still-make-cheap-version-of-new-pricey-drug-to-prevent-preemie-birth-fda-says/2011/03/30/AF6Ymh3B_story.html

  • 2 votes
#7.4 - Mon Apr 11, 2011 1:24 PM EDT
LeZi

Yes, I had a moment during lunch and I found the same thing. I think it is important as a matter of course to double check everything.

Since Stewart is on it, it has a lot of press already. It seems as though the word is out there. Here are some thoughts that I have had as to how to help put pressure on someone, we won't know who until we find that particular "one", that can help.

  • Write your Representatives and Senators
  • Write the President
  • Write the FDA (havn't checked if they have a way to do that!
  • Bring this up on NewsVine (seed if it isn't, write an article, find places where it is appropriate to comment on this
  • Look for articles and seeds concerning Anti-abortion groups. This obscene increase in price is a slap in the face to those that favor a woman taking a baby to term! (Politics make strange bed-fellows!)
  • Write KV Pharmaceutical Company itself and ask why they are doing this.
  • Research and see if you can find a connection with anyone in the FDA an/or KVP
  • Look around for petitions that address this subject.
  • It would be nice to find if there is a Right Wing source that is against this action for some citations in some seeds! There might be an honest RWer that would be opposed to this type of business practice. (we can hope!)

In short, contact as many as you can and see who responds and who doesn't who has what kind of useful information. Keep us informed on this seed and I, and I hope some of the other people here will help to follow up on your responses and continue the pressure.

It might seem like this is a shot in the dark, but if you fire off enough flares, there will be at least some light to guide the quest. This one is so blatant in its greed that we might be surprised by the results. If not, we at least tried and can learn from out efforts how to be more influential for the next time. (there will be another time!) But with this particular case, it might just as well be this time.

Consumer action can be very powerful and I don't think it has been explored nearly enough. This looks like a good place to start.

Don't hesitate to contact me here in a seed or by e-mail if I can help with research or drafting messages etc. I have some things that I am already doing but I certainly can take time to help out a Think Tank member with a special interest project and be happy to do what ever I can.

I think its worth a shot. What do you think?

  • 2 votes
#7.5 - Mon Apr 11, 2011 2:39 PM EDT
Future History

I'm not sure that it will actually be an issue. It appears that, due to the heavilly bad press, the FDA will not be enforcing the "requirement" that pharmacies cease and desist the practice of compounding the affordable generic version of this drug, as they have been doing for years. How disgustingly brazen though, that KV Pharmaceutical had the balls to come out and immediately try to make uber obscene profits at the expense of high risk pregnant women in peril, knowing how vulnerable they are as a target. I'm sure the thought was that these women will pay any price to protect their baby.

The FDA in general is so in bed with Big Pharma - even they were so shocked of this callous display of greed that they had to intervene. Unless the compounding pharmacies are shown to be producing an unsafe product, the FDA claims that the generic will still be available - to the lament of scumbag KV Pharmaceutical.

  • 3 votes
#7.6 - Mon Apr 11, 2011 3:16 PM EDT
LeZi

There you go! See, it was easier than we thought!

Wow! Who would have thought that a Think Tank only had to think about it and a solution would come about!

All in a day. Maybe it helped that there was not any "trash talk" and "idiotic rhetoric" to get in the way! What can we think about next? :-)

  • 2 votes
#7.7 - Mon Apr 11, 2011 6:01 PM EDT
Reply
Leave a Comment:
You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead.
You're in XHTML Mode. If you prefer, you can use Easy Mode instead.
(XHTML tags allowed - a,b,blockquote,br,code,dd,dl,dt,del,em,h2,h3,h4,i,ins,li,ol,p,pre,q,strong,ul)
Newsvine Privacy Statement
As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.
FUN STUFF:
  • Leaderboard |
  • E-Mail Alerts |
  • Top of the Vine |
  • Newsvine Live |
  • Newsvine Archives |
  • The Greenhouse |
COMPANY STUFF:
  • Code of Honor |
  • Company Info |
  • Contact Us |
  • Jobs |
  • User Agreement |
  • Privacy Policy |
  • About our ads
LEGAL STUFF:
  • © 2005-2012 Newsvine, Inc. |
  • Newsvine® is a registered trademark of Newsvine, Inc. |
  • Newsvine is a property of msnbc.com