Why do we let big pharma advertise!?

[BMBiology]

Let’s face it...the benefits to our society is small but the cost is great.

Purdue Pharma offers $10 billion - $12 billion to settle opioid claims Purdue Pharma offers $10 billion - $12 billion to settle opioid claims

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[lord999]

Let’s face it...the benefits to our society is small but the cost is great.

Purdue Pharma offers $10 billion - $12 billion to settle opioid claims Purdue Pharma offers $10 billion - $12 billion to settle opioid claims

That's been an argument since the liberalization due to a very famous court case on commercial speech:

Virginia State Pharmacy Board v. Virginia Citizens Consumer Council - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Because, it's who wins, remember PhRMA is ALWAYS in the Top 10 for lobbying. I think only AARP and the NRA are more consistently up there for duration and expansiveness of targeting.

 

[Argentium]

Freedom of Speech (corrected per below)
Pharmaceutical Advertising, in some form or another, exists in every major country in the world

Does Pharma play a role in minimizing medical inertia? The average time it takes for a new medical practice to be adopted is 17 years according to some literature - and that's with Pharma pushing adoption with advertising, how long would it take otherwise? I don't know the answer, just food for thought

http://epatientdave.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/e-Patient-Dave-Slide-Balas-IOM-17-year-adoption1.jpg

 

[lord999]

Freedom of Speech
Pharmaceutical Advertising, in some form or another, exists in every major country in the world

Does Pharma play a role in minimizing medical inertia? The average time it takes for a new medical practice to be adopted is 17 years according to some literature - and that's with Pharma pushing adoption with advertising, how long would it take otherwise? I don't know the answer, just food for thought

http://epatientdave.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/e-Patient-Dave-Slide-Balas-IOM-17-year-adoption1.jpg

No, talking about pharmaceuticals in advertising doesn't legally exist under common law system tradition as medical services speech is professional speech, which does not have freedom of speech protections as you are making them as a professional (so, while a citizen can say "Cocaine is good for you" under free speech, we can't without incurring liability). That's the US has a very recent tradition to include professional speech under commercial speech (and for much of the 20th Century, it was actually illegal to advertise professional services as that case above denotes). Bad professional speech is officially dealt with as heresy for the cloth, sedition for the coif, and quackery for the rod.

Pharmaceutical advertising for Direct-To-Consumer is a very recent matter (>1975 and not really until 1994 as part of Contract With America changes to commercial speech). Pharmaceutical advertising to professionals as regulated by professional speech, detailmen were a fixture even during my own training and date from long before the Food and Drug Act.