comments (9)

Now if only NZ and the US stopped the advertisments. I would much rather have a "restless leg" than any side effects listed with any of these drugs advertised on tv.

Every ( sensible )country in the world thinks that drug companies should NOT be advertising to the public. Last year alone drugs companies spent about $15 BILLIONS in the USA on advertising to the public. That cost is, indeed, past on to all of us. Their lobby is very well funded and powerful. If we could tell our law makers to ban drug advertising we would all enjoy cheaper drugs.

All chemical pharmaceuticals have side effects. In July of 1998, I was put on a drug called Verapamil for high blood pressure. This drug fell into a group of drugs called 'calcium channel blockers.' In March of 1994, I was diagnosed with colon cancer. I lost fourteen inches of my transverse colon to a humdinger of a tumor. Fortunately it had not yet perforated the intestinal wall. I was dumbfounded! No one on either side of my sizable family has had colon cancer. Two and one half years later, in September and October of 1996, it hit the news for two months that calcium channel blockers cause colon cancer! I weaned myself of the toxic junk and made an appointment with my doctor for the sole purpose of having a fit! I had a good one too. Why wasn't I told about this?
So much for good health care! A prescription for ten days is one thing. But if you take any drug day after day, week after week, month after month for years on end, you're going to get another disease. Guaranteed! It happened to me.

The side effects are often worse than the disease. I pay no attention to any of the pHARMaceutical ads. I couldn't even tell you what one of them are for. Advertising them is an unethical business practice. The drugs aren't fully tested, or tested on animals that do not share our physiology, then it gets pulled after class action suits are filed. I've cleared some health issues with good old homeopathy or holistic treatments.

Or there is a specific kind of red rice that the US won't allow for import because people with high cholesterol can simply eat that instead of taking the drug. They use the rice in one of these Cholestrol Rx's. I'm sure the rice can be found online.

As reported recently in the New England Journal of Medicine, the FDA persuaded the Institute of Medicine (IOM) to look at the problem of adverse reactions to FDA approved drugs. One of the IOM's recommendations was to ban direct-to-consumer advertising for the first two years after FDA approval of a drug. Anyone want to bet that this will happen? (P.S. I am not a physician.)

I think that The side effects are often worse than the disease. Let's Stop the Pharm ads !

I think drug advertising is dangerous because it can convince people to believe they have any particular syndrome, malady, or disease, even if they don't. We are an unhealthy country because we are trained to think we are.

I’ve seen ads on TV for Caduet. It has two ingredients. One is Amlodipine and the other is Atorvastatin. With my RxDrugCard I can get 30 tablets of Amlodipine for $9 and 30 tablets of Simvastatin for $9. I’ll bet they are charging more than $18 for this new drug! The unthinking public is going to pressure their doctors into giving them something just because it’s new when something old or generic would do the job for cheaper.

Post a Comment (* indicates a required field)