It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Story of the First Prescription drug Ad on TV- it was banned, I think they all should be.

page: 4
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in


posted on Jan, 3 2016 @ 12:56 PM
a reply to: reldra

I just read Over-diagnosed: Making People Sick in the Pursuit of Health, by Dr. H. Gilbert Welch, etal.

Mention is made of drug advertising, in the context of creating more patients to buy more drugs, via over(mis)use of diagnostic testing for diseases & condition. In this case, we are all in need of some drug.

I have come to the realization that the idea that insurance comps can no longer legally deny health coverage for pre-existing conditions was never done for our benefit. One diagnostic test result counts as "pre-existing condition". Now there is a way to increase diagnostic testing and have it and its resulting medicines/treatments to be payed.

So, not only will drugs be advertised but testing will be encouraged via ads. People who might never have thought of being tested might now decide (be frightened into) testing. And unneeded drugs and testing will be paid for.

A true story. A friend went to her doctor with symptoms and was given a drug that successfully treated that one condition. But then she was told to undergo testing for things totally unrelated to her condition. She complied and, lo and behold, now she was scared into thinking she was pre-this or that and in need of more testing and drugs. She refused any drugs.

Then she had to visit an emergency room for something unrelated to any of the above. Problem fixed. But the doctor she was referred to by the ER to monitor the problem decided, taking only her word and not once viewing her medical records, to put her on an expensive drug paid for by her insurance. Even the drug company website contraindicated use of their drug in her situation. She was in a vulnerable position that day to refuse, but the next day called the pharmacy to cancel her prescription.

Her doctor just made a note that she was intelligent and had decided not to take the drug. It made me wonder how many vulnerable female patients sitting in his office had succumbed to his pressure and, out of fear, were willing to take any high-powered drug he could sell them on.

The last ten years or so, I have been seeing more and more people around me harmed by the drugs they're taking, for conditions that may or may not be helped in any way by the drug. All this testing and drugs, and these people are worse off.

Oh, before I sign off, here is a link to a website covering controversial issues
Should Prescription Drugs Be Advertised Directly to Consumers?

posted on Jan, 3 2016 @ 03:48 PM
And one more thing, as to why the conspiracy is to make money and not necessarily make better health care....

Currently, there is a firewall between drug reps and the Veterans Health Administration. Like the scare tactics employed to convince people to get tested and use drugs (under the guise of "preventative healthcare"), there has been a scare and anger program to rally politicians to "privatize" the VA. This would result in the firewall being effectively done away with, as services would be given in the private sector, to a large, new population ripe for the picking.

A family member this past year received excellent, timely VA hospital care. If he had received the same care in the private sector under contract with the VA, he probably would have been told he needed to undergo testing and been put on a table-full of useless, potentially harmful drugs, all paid for by the VA.

I'm afraid the "first, do no harm" injunction no longer refers to patients but to the innumerable companie doing business with doctors and/or influencing public health.

<< 1  2  3   >>

log in