“Trump Moves to Crack Down on Drug Advertising” (NYT):
The administration is proposing a return to a 1990s-era policy that kept most drug ads off TV. That could dent the revenues of drugmakers and major networks.
The proposal, which would effectively reverse a 1997 policy change that opened the floodgates to a deluge of TV drug advertising, is likely to be aggressively opposed by the drug industry, which has long had the courts on its side on this issue.
Past efforts to even modestly restrict drug advertising have been blocked by the courts on First Amendment grounds.
I would be delighted if our kids could be spared from having to learn about all of the disgusting diseases that afflict adults when they’re trying to enjoy an NFL game, but it seems as though the Trump plan is not a blanket “no disgusting diseases” policy. The workaround of the First Amendment is to force pharma companies to disclose all of the disgusting side effects of their marginally effective products.
On Tuesday, the administration said that it planned to return “to the status quo policy pre-1997.” It said that companies would no longer be allowed to simply “recite a vague ‘major-risk statement’ and then point viewers to a website, toll-free number, or print insert for more complete information.” Instead, they would have to give detailed safety information in the ad itself.
[the hated sub-dictator RFK, Jr.] likes to point out that the United States and New Zealand are the only wealthy countries that do not sharply restrict prescription drug advertisements.
The F.D.A. has significantly slowed the pace of its warnings to drug companies about ads that do not align with federal rules. In 2010, the agency’s Office of Prescription Drug Promotion issued about 50 warning letters, and it posted at least 20 letters per year through 2013, according to an analysis by the law firm Covington.
In more recent years, the numbers have fallen to five or fewer warning or so-called untitled letters per year, typically telling companies that they overstated the effectiveness of a treatment.
If Trump is successful what would replace pharma ads on TV? It has to be something that is ridiculously lucrative and also mass market. AI is ridiculously lucrative, but everyone with enough money to buy Nvidia’s server chips already knows about Nvidia and the average consumer would buy only a gaming GPU board, no longer a significant source of revenue or Nvidia. Maybe OnlyFans? From Hearst, the company where I built most of my early web publishing software (user activity analysis, catalog shopping ecommerce with credit card billing (same weekend that Amazon launched!), ad serving, content management, nationwide classified ads with auctioning (same month that eBay launched!), etc.), “Inside the Rise of OnlyFans on Campus” (Town and Country):
From Harvard in 2017, “Do not get sold on drug advertising”:
The United States and New Zealand are the only countries where drug makers are allowed to market prescription drugs directly to consumers. The U.S. consumer drug advertising boom on television began in 1997, when the FDA relaxed its guidelines relating to broadcast media.
> Can Trump get rid of drug ads..
Yes, he can! This time it’s different!!
The iatrogenic industry should not lose any sleep over that.
Does anyone under 50 ever watch ads? All young people are watching the NFL on their DVR. I am happy that old people are subsidizing my TV viewing by watching all the drug ads that they are actually candidates for.
Ask your doctor about Prozwack for depression caused by Becky. Ask your doctor about Disabilify for treatment resistant depression. Ask your doctor about Agrezza for irreversible tardive dyskinesia.
🤪
Ask your doctor why he prescribed Seroquel to keep gramma quiet! Because some cute Becky with a marketing degree took him to lunch:
https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/pr/pharmaceutical-giant-astrazeneca-pay-520-million-label-drug-marketing
@Terry Davis
From the Harvard article “Do not get sold on drug advertising”
Tell that to the M.D.s. Drug pushers are going to get at us however they can, “2 for 5”:
https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=2+for+5
or “ask your doctor” or “have some samples, Dr. Feelgood”. (Apparently also a street dealing technique, according to “The Wire” series–“The first one is free, homeboy.”)
“Older men are a prime target for prescription drug advertisements since they are prone to multiple chronic health conditions, but they should approach them critically”
Opioids weren’t really advertised on TV, so the overwhelming bias towards older (white and black) men having prescription opioid overdoses, was driven by Medical Science, medical “journals”, and Becky drug reps on the doctor’s side (where the buck should stop, given their exclusive privilege and responsibilities for prescribing them.)
Atypical antipsychotics like risperidone apparently used both direct to Dr. and consumer TV ads. “Studies” indicated that they had some benefit for treating depression. They also interact at a low level with the motor and endocrine systems, having a dopaminergic action, leading to men lactating, (irreversible) muscle movements, weight gain, high blood sugar.
Since they were originally developed as a kind of humane lobotomy for people on the psychotic spectrum, they also caused to people on them who weren’t to zombify. I guess the underlying mechanism is that they soon forget about their difficulty facing the world, and face inward at their new issues. The cycle of nature, a new metamorphic, diabetic cash cow emerges from the cocoon.
A depressive friend told me they called a suicide hotline, which recommended as a first-line treatment, “Have you tried watching TV to alleviate your depression?”. Yikes.
Our Ivy League, freshman dorm resident advisor (RA) posed in Playboy with a pseudonym. Every copy on the newsstand was sold out. You would have never known she would do something like that for money, she seemed like such a schoolmarm, with glasses and her hair up.
In the 80’s, we had ads for toys, cars, stereos, TV’s, computers, food. Surprised how many commercials on VHS are for foods. Guess no-one knows what food is, anymore. The free tier on X has been good enough for lions. Guess some guys can get addicted enough to lose their shirt. Wonder what the endowed 20 year olds are even doing in school. If lions could make that much today, they sure wouldn’t have spent all those years reloading greenspun.com.
In the ’80s we used to watch Monty Python on The People’s Broadcasting System, no commercials within the show, and we received a tote bag instead of Symbalta. One major side effect was walking around the house annoying our little sister, saying:
“What’s the point of going abroad if you’re just another tourist carted around in buses surrounded by sweaty mindless oafs from Kettering and Coventry in their cloth caps and their cardigans and their transistor radios and their Sunday Mirrors, complaining about the tea – ‘Oh they don’t make it properly here, do they, not like at home’ – and stopping at Majorcan bodegas selling fish and chips and Watney’s Red Barrel and calamares and two veg and sitting in their cotton frocks squirting Timothy White’s suncream all over their puffy raw swollen purulent flesh ‘cos they ‘overdid it on the first day.’ And being herded into endless Hotel Miramars and Bellvueses and Continentales with their modern international luxury roomettes and draught Red Barrel and swimming pools full of fat German businessmen pretending they’re acrobats forming pyramids and frightening the children and barging into queues and if you’re not at your table spot on seven you miss the bowl of Campbell’s Cream of Mushroom soup, the first item on the menu of International Cuisine, and every Thursday night the hotel has a bloody cabaret in the bar, featuring a tiny emaciated…”
I am fine with keeping drug ads on TV and in print, but the last 2 seconds of the add, or the fine print that lists side effects, must be expanded to take up at least 50% of the ad’s time or print space.
Question: Why is it that we get flooded with TV ads for every prescription drug imaginable, but not a single one for the essential healing marijuana where both mom and dad can enjoy at home?
This whole drug ad business is mystifying in so many ways.
1. For some of these drugs the market seems so specific that it wouldn’t seem worthwhile to advertise.
2. Do the people who see these ads and think they should talk to their doctor about them actually call their doctors and get past the moat of voice menus and multiple administrative layers to have a heartfelt conversation with the Doctor about whether they need Flazinomide™ for their ailments?
3. Do they think that the doctor hasn’t already considered Flazinomide™ as a treatment for their particular condition?
Dear Penthouse, …
Sorry, looks like marketing/recruiting copy. Most or nearly all OnlyFans “creators” make far less while showing a lot more.