Disease Mongering epidemic

Yep.

It is a national disgrace here in America that so many drugs are promoted in television ads.

I'm not nuts about the lawyer ads promoting class action law suits either, but the drug things are getting out of hand.

What are people being asked to do...go to their doctor and tell him/her what they have decided to take based on a commercial?

Finally, we agree.

Doggone, Roger. We agree on a lot of things. I just can't think of the others right now.

I don't recall what it was, either.

Anyway; high five.

The companies in question are modern day robber barons. They don't care about the lives they destroy in the quest for money and power. I have been noting for years how they tout these drugs to manage symptoms, not caring that the health of many users is ruined by side effects. I blame the FDA for not doing a proper job and congress for there being no protecting laws.

I agree 75% with that sentiment. I think all those commercials do create a low level panic around health conditions. The 25% comes from the benefit of having an educated patient. People who think that decline in function is "just old age" may realize that they can get help and a higher quality of life if they just discuss their condition with a medical professional. As long as a doctor is involved in actually making the medical diagnosis, I'm not ready to say we should ban medical advertising.

I read you loud and clear on that, Engineer.

Anything that informs the public has value...and that cannot simply be dismissed.

I think, however, that the level of noise on television these days regarding various drug products has become so loud, the benefits are not worth the bother. Some of the warnings are almost farcical. Ya gotta wonder who would take the stuff…and ya gotta wonder why anyone would want to advertise the product knowing the disclaimers that are involved.

The only answer I’ve been able to come up with it…$$$$$$. These commercials have got to be filling the cash register…which probably means there is some involvement of doctors also.

Fine line between running a profitable doctoring business…and practicing decent medicine.

Strong lobby for the drug companies…and I doubt these ads will be banned. But some fix is probably needed…and may come to pass.

Someday!

A number of the ads I have heard gives a disclaimer about side effects and one disclaimer even included "sudden death," If someone hears that disclaimer, and still wants the drug, what is the problem? Protect those that are willing to take risks?

Then there shouldn't be casinos. No taverns. Cars won't have enough horse-power to go over 55 mph. It's a slippery slope of being spoon fed by big brother, in my opinion.

The diseases are real for the drugs being hyped. It is just that the drugs are new, and apparently many new drugs have side-effects, more than aspirin. So, stop the research on new drugs? Or, figure out through genetic testing of the lab animals in the testing phase, which genomes will have the side effects. Then we can all get our genomes identified, and we can know which drugs are safe for us, as individual genomes. Ah, but that would be expensive. Never mind.

Strong lobby for the drug companies…and I doubt these ads will be banned. But some fix is probably needed…and may come to pass.>>

One way to find out which drugs are needed and not needed is stop taking them and see what the effect is.

“Government and co-operation are in all things the laws of life. Anarchy and competition, the laws of death.” John Ruskin (1819 - 1900)

It might be a good idea to have someone review your entire personal formulary, but this might be a very bad suggestion to follow blindly.

It used to be not allowed to advertise in the US as well. Not sure exactly when it was opened up. But since then we get to hear all about diseases and other medical issues that we were not ever have the pleasure to hear about.

It is great when you 4 year old asks what happens when you have an erection for 4 hours.

Pharma has always been able to advertise in the U.S., but a consumer protection regulation was interpreted by a Federal court as requiring an advertiser to prominently name all known side-effects if they named a drug and claimed health benefits from taking it. The drug companies were stymied for a while, then some "genius" of advertising (i really despise advertising) realized that if you just have touchy-feely happy ads which don't actually make claims for a drug, they could get past the requirement. Cialis is a good example--they show things not getting done around the house, a pot boiling over or a roast burning in the oven, and then show a middle-aged couple emerging from the bedroom with smirks on their faces. Then they tell you to ask your doctor about the drug. Doctors have been getting kick-backs from big pharma since the days of witch doctors--they know what time it is, and if they don't think they can get sued for malpractice, they'll be happy to prescibe. I could go on for paragraphs about the scams between doctors and drug companies.