Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Warning: Drug Ads Can Make You Sick

By Terry J. Allen, In These Times. Posted January 3, 2008.


The drug industry spends billion on advertising that tells us health and happiness are commodities, and anything less is a disease.
Advertisement

Jane's family is suffering from plagues of biblical-lite proportions. Her teenage son is unruly and easily distracted. Her daughter has menstrual cramps, is 12 pounds overweight and shy. Her husband sleeps fitfully and has occasional heartburn and irregularity -- not to mention that his libido is falling and his cholesterol rising. As for Jane, her menopause generates more heat than a blowtorch. Her knees twinge, her breasts are less perky and her jaw line more blurred. Her personality is flat and her legs restless. All of them are less happy than they think they should be.

Although there is a diagnosis, pill or surgical treatment for each of their ills, the family members could simply be suffering from exposure to advertising that sells a fantasy of flawless health, perfect skin, clockwork bowels, extended youth and perpetual cheerfulness in the face of disappointment, aging, money woes and the reign of George Bush. They may, in fact, be healthy people snookered by the pharmaceutical industry, the media and their doctors into believing that ordinary frailties are diseases; that the human condition can be cured.

A $4.2 billion annual industry incessantly reinforces this medicalization of complaints through direct-to-consumer (DTC) advertising.

In 1998, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) decided to allow pharmaceutical companies to hawk prescription drugs to the public, with limited oversight and minimal explanation of safety and side effects. A 2006 Government Accountability Office investigation found some of these marketing efforts "false and misleading" and faulted the FDA -- which is responsible for oversight -- for failing to maintain standards of accuracy and to protect the public. The United States and New Zealand are the only countries that allow DTC marketing.

Big Pharma says that the goal of DTC ads is to educate the public about what treatments are available. But there is no denying that the images of people caressed by soporific green moths, charmed by Latino bees and enticed by sexually fulfilled couples can create expectations and perceived needs that lead to unnecessary and expensive drug consumption. Some of the products are only minimally effective. Many can cause liver or kidney damage, high blood pressure or other adverse effects that would have to be countered with still more drugs -- each with its own side effects and risky interactions.

One undeniable side effect of DTCs is increased sales and profits for drug manufacturers. "Every $1 the pharmaceutical industry spent on DTC advertising in 2000 yielded an additional $4.20 in drug sales," the Kaiser Family Foundation recently reported. Indeed, direct-to-consumer advertising "was responsible for 12 percent of the increase in prescription drugs sales, or an additional $2.6 billion."

Many doctors act as enablers. A majority of them reported that DTC ads caused patients to "confuse relative risks and benefits" or to believe the drugs "worked better than they do," according to the FDA. Almost three out of four docs said patients were spurred by the ads to ask for unnecessary prescriptions and to expect a prescription for every condition. Nonetheless, despite feeling pressured and sometimes ambivalent about efficacy, safety and appropriateness, doctors turned down requests for a brand-name prescription only 2 percent of the time, the FDA found.

Americans are swallowing a lot of pills. Spending on prescription drugs is America's most rapidly increasing healthcare cost and, in 2004, outpatient prescription medications -- 3 billion scripts worth $200 billion a year -- constituted nearly 20 percent of healthcare spending, according to a government survey. Almost half of us take at least one prescription medicine, and one in six downs three or more medications, according to a 2004 Department of Health and Human Services report.

There is something in the American character that loves a quick technological fix, and DTC advertising convinces us that drugs can cure our physical and psychological aches and pains -- even our existential crises and obnoxious personality traits. While many people with debilitating depression do find better living through chemistry, there may be something wrong with a definition of normality that classifies one in 10 women, 18 years of age and older, as so clinically depressed that she requires powerful antidepressants. Or a definition of normality that diagnoses 15 percent of 16-year-old boys with attention deficit hyper-activity disorder (ADHD). ADHD drugs make up three of the top five drugs for children age 17 and younger (sales totaling $1.3 billion in 2004). And of the 4.4 million 4- to 17-year-olds with an ADHD diagnosis, more than half were medicated despite what the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention called "substantial health risks."

The old joke used to be this: A doctor who finds a patient healthy hasn't looked hard enough. DTC advertising cuts out the middleman and allows the consumer to over-diagnose. It directly exploits the public's fears and hopes by planting the illusion -- and then preying on it -- that health, youth and happiness are commodities, and anything less is a disease.

Digg!

See more stories tagged with: direct-to-consumer advert, drug industry

Terry J. Allen is a senior editor of In These Times. Her work has appeared in Harper's, The Nation, New Scientist and other publications.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Suckers
Posted by: kepstein7777 on Jan 3, 2008 3:06 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Does this article suggest that allowing DTC advertising is a bad thing? It seems to, as if there is some line between advertising for shampoo and for pills.

I find the ads annoying too, but isn't it a free country and a free market? If the consumer is allowed to discern whether Miracle Laundry Detergent can remove axle grease from a wedding dress, why can't they be trusted to discern whether there's a pill to turn a frumpy, depressed, middle-aged woman into a beautiful 20-year-old princess dancing slow-motion across a meadow of wildflowers?

Plus, while she's dancing, they even tell you that the pills can cause your fingers to fall off, as well as chronic nosebleeds and hair loss.

What's the alternative...indirect to consumer? It sounds like you would rather go back to the Marcus Welby days when Pharm ads are considered too tacky for TV and the doctor provides all the answers.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Suckers Posted by: EKSwitaj
» Round and Round Posted by: pdxstudent
» actually... Posted by: undrgrndgirl
» RE: Suckers- Hypochondriacs Heaven Posted by: sasquuatch55
I sincerely hope ........
Posted by: Shey on Jan 3, 2008 3:25 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
.......that the previous comment was meant to be ironic.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: I sincerely hope ........ Posted by: newtype_alpha
Only 20% of health care costs are drugs?
Posted by: leland61 on Jan 3, 2008 4:31 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If that is true, then it still doesn't match the 30-33% that is skimmed off by the insurance industry for fluff and nonsense.

Eliminate the insurance industry and regulate the chemical (drug) companies and cut 40-50% of health care costs in the USA.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Illness Hypnosis
Posted by: Astroboy on Jan 3, 2008 5:09 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What many people do not understand is the emmense harmfulness and damage these DTC ads cause and create.

These ads make up illnesses which never before existed, until, through hypnosis, we actually create them in ourselves.

Most people do not understand the direct corrolation between the mind and body and the body's natural response to the direction coming from the mind.

Even public service announcements such as breast cancer screenings. These ads have actually increased the breast cancer rate rather than decrease it.

They suggest annual breast exams and even teach how to examine your own breasts on a regular basis. This sends a message from your mind to your body that it must be on alert. It induces fear, which lowers your immune system. It creates anticipation that you might be suceptable and the body naturally begins to set up physioloical conditions in the body for just such a possibilty. If the woman over-focuses and maintains a strong sense of fear, the body becomes even more suceptable because the body is merely doing what it is suppose to do - take direction from the mind, and then acts on it.

It may not seem the right thing to do, but the body has it's it's own integrity and it will kill you if you direct it to.

The same goes with all these DTC ads. So if you want restless leg syndrome, a flacid penis, pre-pre-menstural syndrome, HDHD, or any of the panoply of maladies Big Pharma is offering to sell you - help yourself.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Illness Hypnosis Posted by: Cathyc
» You Keep Begging the Question Posted by: pdxstudent
» RE: You Keep Begging the Question Posted by: peacefullaim
» RE: Illness Hypnosis Posted by: lepidopteryx
» RE: Illness Hypnosis Posted by: peacefullaim
» RE: Illness Hypnosis Posted by: Astroboy
Big Pharma, Heal Thyself!
Posted by: jmmartin on Jan 3, 2008 5:40 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Ever since Big Pharma started putting commercials on TV to hype their pills and nostrums to gullible American consumers, I have thought it a bad, essentially stupid idea. Madison Avenue, in its weaker moments, will admit that the whole point of advertising is to sell us what we don't need, so why should drug-pitch TV ads be any different.

The problem, as I see it, is best illustrated with the TV spots for Ropinirole (Requip). On his HBO program, Bill Maher recently picked up this topic and pointedly, specifically singled out this pharmaceutical as the best example of how the commercials are designed to convince us that we have an illness or disease -- in this case something called "restless leg syndrome." His quip brought nervous but knowing laughter from the studio audience.

This is not to say that there is no such thing as restless leg syndrome. But whereas it once was an obscure, infrequently occurring problem known only as Wittmaack-Ekbom's syndrome, or nocturnal myoclonus, now it's a widespread, common disorder that can (and should) affect millions. And don't you just love the announcer's catechism of side-effects? They even include compulsive gambling! (For that matter consider the warnings for Cialis: four-hour erections require immediate medical attention. Hey, if I got a four-hour erection, going to the doctor would be the last thing on my mind.)

The point is, we have enough health problems without the constant barrage of adynaton for stuff we probably don't need. The more gullible will eventually convince themselves that the occasional cramp in the ankle is restless leg syndrome and go to a doctor for a script. Physicians, in their weaker moments, will admit that they sometimes hand out chits for things merely because the Big Pharma rep brought them samples (as well as bottles of single malt scotch, trips to golf courses in Edinburg for "seminars," &c.)

I know, I know, Big Pharma would cry First Amendment infringement if we were to curtail such propaganda, but Congress could, at the very least, try to get them to voluntarily cease and desist. And if it came to that, an exception to Freedom of Speech might hold up to scrutiny by the Supremes if enough evidence could be mashalled showing that the cures are worse than the diseases.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Big Pharma, Heal Thyself! Posted by: VannaLaRoche
» RE: Big Pharma, Heal Thyself! Posted by: lepidopteryx
» RE: Big Pharma, Heal Thyself! Posted by: bornxeyed
» RE: Big Pharma, Heal Thyself! Posted by: graffen48
STOP Medicalization or "Disease Mongering"
Posted by: drricklippin on Jan 3, 2008 6:23 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Thanks Terry Allen-

There is no pill to-
-cure a bad relationship
-cure social and economic injustice
-cure a meaningless and stressful job
-cure a "winter of our discontent"
- etc

Big PhRMA is deluding us and diverting our energies by suggesting a pharmacologic solution to these problems. It's called Medicalization or "Disease Mongering". Stan Cox has written about it on AlterNet.

Marx said religion is the opiate of the masses. Well- drugs are a new religion. So ironically drugs are the opiate of the masses. in the 21st century

So let's work to restrict or ban DTC advertising. Pure and simple "drug pushing".

And don't let Big PhRMA numb you! Just say no!

Dr. Rick Lippin
Southampton,Pa.
http://medicalcrises.blogspot.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: It is such a strange thing Posted by: graffen48
Alli
Posted by: lepidopteryx on Jan 3, 2008 6:32 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I saw an ad for the diet pill (sorry - weight loss aid) Alli the othr day. One of the things they specifically mention in the ad is that if you take Alli, you must limit the amount of fat in your diet. Excuse me, but if you limit the amount of fat in your diet, then wouldn't you lose weight without the need for Alli? Perhaps it's liminting the amount of fat in yoyr diet that makes you lose weight, and all Alli does is make the drug company that manufatures it richer.
As for OTC drugs, they're just as bad in terms of creating a need where none exists. Take fiber laxatives, for example. My daughter asked me after seeing one of these ads when she was about 10, "If that stuff is made from vegetable fiber, then couldn't you get the same result by just eating raw vegetables?" She asked me a similar question about vitamin supplements. "Why not just eat a balanced diet? Then you don't need supplements because the vitamins are in the food."
Smart girl, my daughter.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Food as medicine Posted by: Cathyc
» RE: Alli (i.e., orlistat) Posted by: mjabele
» RE: Alli (i.e., orlistat) Posted by: peacefullaim
When Cannabis was banned 70 years ago, it was designed to help Big Pharma FUCK America to DEATH !
Posted by: maxpayne on Jan 3, 2008 6:40 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Let us first SHUT DOWN THE DRUG WAR and let the real cures such as Cannabis into the market. You can't have a truly free market if Big Pharma is given the lopsided advantage of POISONING America to DEATH while at the same time banning Cannabis or RIGGING the market to stifle competition from other likewise natural plants in the first place.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» yes, max you are quite right! Posted by: undrgrndgirl
» RE: yes, max you are quite right! Posted by: peacefullaim
uh...
Posted by: JoshuaLudd on Jan 3, 2008 7:06 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"The drug industry spends billion on advertising that tells us health and happiness are commodities, and anything less is a disease"

Thats not just the drug industry... that is ALL advertising. And each and every one tells us that our disease.. the one we all have at one time or another... can be cured by buying their wares. We all have it because their wares and our consumerism only hold off that "disease" for a little while. Then we have to buy more because it isn't a cure. It is just feeding into the disease rather than dealing with our condition.. notice I did not say "cure".

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: uh... Posted by: peacefullaim
Pill Junkies
Posted by: Roger Király on Jan 3, 2008 7:26 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
My wife, who's 64, is a biology teacher and is appalled at the number of prescription medicines that her young colleagues take. It's not uncommon for her co-workers who are in their 30s to be taking 2 or 3 or 4 prescription medicines daily, often for pseudo-conditions mentioned in this article. Of course, the insurance company (CIGNA) pays for all of these drugs. Yet, in the aftermath of my broken ankle and surgery, CIGNA refuses to pay for a physical therapist or a visiting nurse to instruct me in the rehabilitation exercises needed to regain strength and flexibility in my ankle. (We live in a very rural area with a steep hill leading up to our driveway and I can't crutch up the icy hill to get to a physical therapist.) Strange priorites. I told the orthopedic surgeon that the only way I could think of to get CIGNA to pay for a physical therapist or visiting nurse to come to our home would be to attempt to crutch up the icy hill, fall, and break my hip. (For a minute, he thought I was serious---one more example of the lack of a sense of irony that I've experienced in most of the physicians I've had to interact with.) I found some rehabilitation exercises on the Internet and am doing them on my own with no supervision, which is better than nothing, I guess. I only wish there was a pill I could take.......

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Medical Insurance Junkies? Posted by: Cathyc
» RE: Pill Junkies Posted by: peacefullaim
One Problem: contain the advts
Posted by: PaulK on Jan 3, 2008 7:35 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"This medicine will enable you to see your daughter get married. It will enable you to joyously run across the beach or a wooded path in paradise, and find the time to do all those wonderful things." That's what the visuals tell you. Meanwhile the voice is telling you, "Side effects include liver damage, addiction, your willie won't ever work again, and nausea from this ad. If you suddenly die, call your doctor. See all the details printed in 'Bangladesh Philately' magazine, in a language you can't read called medical techspeak."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

GENTLEMEN PREFER HANES
Posted by: VZEQICVA on Jan 3, 2008 7:45 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If you don't remember that commercial it was for panty hose. It was offensive to many because it implied that women wanted their legs to look good for men. That happens to be true. But the ad isn't around anymore. Now they can advertise prescription medicines and fool both men AND women at the same time. All the (well paid) models in the ads, men and women have great hair. What do they take for that? Thank God for the remote. ANNA

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Just reading about it makes me sick
Posted by: Gravitas on Jan 3, 2008 9:20 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Pharma has gone from greedy to evil! I have just finished reading Dispensing With the Truth by Alicia Mundy. Even I, who knew they were underhanded, am shocked by what this book reveals. It is about the fen-phen crisis and how that drug caused a heart lung failure in patients who died tortuous deaths. But Wyeth KNEW that this side effect existed and tried to cover it up! What is really shocking was how much influence they had at the FDA. How congressmen helped them get it approved. How organizations like C.Everett Coop's Shape Up America helped promote the obesity crisis with funding from Wyeth. (And Wyeth cut funding after the scandal came out.) How msm put studies saying their was no risk from the drugs on the front page even though evidence clearly showed otherwise. This company was so dirty, they made the 70 year old plantiffs in one case turn over their daughters funeral registry and bereavement cards in an effort to discredit her. She was a young barely plump church goer about to be married when she took the drugs and later died hooked up to a heart pump. This book should have been a best seller! Because this whole phenomena is about more than restless leg syndrome. It shows that our health system is run by the ruthless and powerhungry! It is as far away from genuine health as we can get. And if anyone who reads this book still falls for their marketing, well I can't feel sorry for them!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Big Pharma is EVIL! Posted by: Cathyc
Christmas Pills or God's "Green Herb" (Genesis)
Posted by: lc on Jan 3, 2008 9:20 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Watching network TV this past Christmas season I hardly realized it was the season. Many times I flipped the news channel to find the same drug promoted in the same time slot on all three networks. Drugs have taken over the ad market. Ron Popel can't even afford to advertise his cheap fishing rod or new vegimatic. I will remember Christmas 2007 as the year Santa filled everybody's stocking with pills.
Fortunately, I was stocked up on God's Green Herb which helped me to get through the drug induced haze commercial TV is today.
Up in Smoke
IM
Belteshazzar

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Love that fibromyalgia commercial
Posted by: VannaLaRoche on Jan 3, 2008 9:29 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I really struggled with my fibromyalgia today . . . says the elegant, impeccably dressed and perfectly thin woman in the ad for Lyrica.

Side effects of Lyrica include massive weight gain and swelling of the hands and feet.

But . . . the woman on TV obviously isn't having that problem--see the bony clavicles and slender hands. Probably wearing a size 0. Who wouldn't want to be her? Enjoying her art class, too, actually has leisure time.

Show me a woman who represents the condition of women on message boards and forums, who lament how absolutely awful the side effects of Lyrica are. Forty-pound weight gain, shoes that won't fit.

And I love the way she calls it "a real widespread pain condition." They can't legally call it a disease, see.

I'm of the opinion that fibromyalgia and CFS and MSD, BPD, and possibly many other contemporary "real medical conditions" are either the cumulative toxicity of a synthetics-consuming, overmedicated society, a psychoneuroimmunological condition of protest against the demands made of modern humans, or both. Chronically tired? Hurt all over? That's the world today.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» as an fms sufferer... Posted by: undrgrndgirl
» RE: as an fms sufferer... Posted by: peacefullaim
Meanwhile, at the other end of the commercials...
Posted by: Sushi on Jan 3, 2008 10:43 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...they are advertising unhealthy, chemical-laden junk food, constantly encouraging "snacking" and prepared foods that have marginal nutrition at maximum profits. Many "illnesses" and diseases are self-inflicted through overloading the body with sugar, hydrogenated fats, salt and unpronouncable laboratory concoctions (pesticides) that otherwise would be considered too toxic for landfills or better used for degreasing parking garages.

Factor in our toxic air, rocket fuel found in most water sources, phosphorus fizzing colas leaching calcium from our bones, overuse of antibiotics, steroids (for faster calf-to-saleable steer profits, undocumented (therefore untested) uneducated kitchen workers handling our food, unethical grocery stores cheating on sell-by dates and now questionable foreign sources of ingredients. While a chemical may be benign individually, combine them with several others or heat it...what does it become then?

We are being sold many of our illnesses, then sold the antidote! Why would anyone continue eating something that gave them heartburn, made them gassy, raised their blood pressure, exhausted their adrenals, or create osteoporosis? Sell us vitamins because the foods they sell us left them devoid of nutrients. Too "busy" too spend 10 minutes cutting up ingredients for a 3 minute stir-fry, but not too busy to sit in front of vacuous shows for hours while snacking on crap?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Amazing, isn't it? Posted by: Cathyc
suckers
Posted by: cwilsondrum on Jan 3, 2008 11:14 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
who was it that said "there's a sucker born every minute"? By now it's every thirty seconds.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: suckers Posted by: VZEQICVA
ADHD is a myth - but a profitable one.
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Jan 3, 2008 11:49 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
See http://www.methylphenidate.net/ for a good overview.

Essentially, the pharmaceutical industry, in alliance with dishonest university professors and public relations experts, cooked this up as a way of pushing amphetamines on kids.

The kids who take these medications are being dosed with the equivalent of 'speed', or 'ice', or 'crank' - street names for methamphetamine, the cheap and highly addictive amphetamine. All the ADHD drugs are amphetamine derivatives - potent central nervous system stimulants. The kids get addicted to these substances, and if they are then taken off the drugs, they really act crazy - just like a meth addict in the throes of withdrawal.

The other most prevalent class of drugs for kids - the Paxil, Prozac, SSRI (selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors) have been shown to cause serious side effects - see Spitzer case against SSRI manufacturers (Johnson & Johnson, GlaxoSmithKline, and Forest Laboratories)

"The New York Post reviewed a sampling of adverse event reports of children who became violent, self-mutilated, and attempted suicide during Paxil clinical trials from 1994 to 2001.

"One internal document lists 23 children and teens as making suicide attempts." [Edelman]

The New York Times reported yesterday that New York State Attorney General, Eliot Spitzer, has broadened his probe of the drug industry's fraudulent marketing practices.

"Johnson & Johnson is the third drug company to come under scrutiny from Mr. Spitzer in recent months over its handling of clinical trial data and drug marketing practices. Mr. Spitzer has previously said that he planned to use legal action or the threat of legal action to force greater industry disclosure of clinical trial findings, an issue that has drawn intense public interest."

The public has awakened to the fact that senior FDA officials have shown little interest in using their authority to protect children from drugs whose hazardous effects they knew."


How many of the famous school shooters of recent years were on these drugs? Cho, for example...

Then you've got the opiate pushers, namely Purdue, source of the so-called "hillbilly heroin" , i.e. oxycontin. They hired Giuliani in order to get the DEA off their case: DEA deal with Giuliani and Purdue to keep the oxycontin flowing.

Pablo Escobar never had it so good.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Me and ADD/ADHD Posted by: pdxstudent
» RE: Me and ADD/ADHD Posted by: peacefullaim
Faucets
Posted by: Kitty Lady Oregon on Jan 3, 2008 12:13 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The ad that absolutely fascinates me is the one for the LD problem - Cialis, I believe it is. How do they get the water into the bathtubs without any faucets or drain plugs? The two people alwlays end up in two tubs of water, so they can't really make use of the LD treatment, or maybe they already have and are just washing up. But how do they get the water in there???

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Faucets Posted by: lepidopteryx
» RE: Faucets Posted by: VZEQICVA
» RE: Faucets and more!! Posted by: graffen48
» RE: Faucets Posted by: peacefullaim
A Real and Serious Problem
Posted by: UP58 on Jan 3, 2008 2:36 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I was glad to see this article and the subsequent discussion. I have become increasingly annoyed and disgusted by all the prescription medicine commericals on TV and, in fact, was going to investigate whether there is any extant organization working to remove them. Does anyone know of any? My understanding is that the US is the only country other than New Zealand which currently permits them to be aired.

Personally, I do not think that they perform any useful public service; rather, I believe they are harmful. I agree with the description above that they are "disease mongering." As Allen states, "Almost three out of four docs said patients were spurred by the ads to ask for unnecessary prescriptions and to expect a prescription for every condition." This is what I have suspected.

It has indeed been demonstrated that some syndromes have been manufactured or renamed in order to make them more memorable on TV. I also find the required (and important) disclaimers and lists of side effects quite distasteful. Why not eliminate the ads entirely so the latter wouldn't be necessary?

Oh, and incidentally - as someone who worked with children with learning disabilities for many years and was later an educational researcher, ADHD is not a manufactured condition, and Allen does not say that it is. However, it is - as he indicates - grossly overdiagnosed, especially by people who have no business making that diagnosis, i.e., teachers or school administrators, who often use it as a fallback strategy for disruptive students. It should only be diagnosed by qualified professionals. True, there has been a long-standing debate about the appropriate treatment, but I won't go into that here.

If privacy laws permitted, which they don't, I could readily identify many persons who, as children at least, clearly exhibited the accepted criteria for this syndrome, which, until recently, were primarily behavioral. I say "until recently" because newer, groundbreaking brain studies, as at Yale, have been able to identify specific neurological patterns which underlie these behaviors. One of the problems with this issue, in addition to overdiagnosis, has been the excessive hyper-energetic advocacy (irony intended) of some parent groups.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Big Pharma and Guinea-Pigs Posted by: Cathyc
have you paid close attention to
Posted by: undrgrndgirl on Jan 3, 2008 8:38 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
the ads for antidepressants (ssri's)...one of them states 70% of people on antidepressants still feel depressed...70%, 70% - that means anti-depressants WORK only 30% of the time...what would happen if you only worked 30% of the time? or your car? or if you got 30% on your midterm? you would FAIL that's what...but what does big-phamra suggest - why another pill of course...don't stop the one you are taking, just add this one on top.
and did you know ssri's are based on cocaine, and no one really knows what they will do to users brains over extended periods of use!
i even heard a pediatrician in oklahoma tout the use of ssri's in children and adolescents because it truncated their emotions! oh my gawd!! truncated emotions can't be good!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: have you paid close attention to Posted by: lepidopteryx