2006-11-10 13:03:33 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Cultures & Groups ➔ Other - Cultures & Groups
It's called Direct-to-Consumer advertising and it started in 2000.
It has been estimated that for the 25 biggest drug companies advertising on TV for every $1 spent in advertising they rake in $4.20 in drug sales...that's a pretty nice profit. It is directly responsible for 12% of the increase in drug sales (2.6 billion)
What makes me laugh about the whole thing is half the time they don't actually tell you what a particular drug is prescribed for..then they tell you to call and ask your doctor if it is right for you... can you imagine actually doing that? Hey doc, should i take #$%^&*?....imagine if you ARE a woman and it's for ED! Boy, would I feel like an idiot....
The second thing about it is they always list all the complications and side effects that could arise from taking the medication..talk about a turn-off....most of the time I'm sitting there thinking I might just prefer to stay sick if this stuff could potentially blind me for life, give me a heart attack, or leave me sitting on the toilet for most of the day..(at least..it's a good thing for truth in advertising though)..
I think in general the drugs that are advertised are sending pretty good messages...it probably helps people with depression, ED and cholesterol problems to realize that they aren't alone and that there are ways to fix their problems...I'll tell you what though..if that Bob guy loses his swimming trunks just once more on TV in the middle of the day..I'm going to have to call some kind of ethics committee..tee hee
Hope this helped
2006-11-10 13:36:21 · answer #1 · answered by KED 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Actually, advertising for drugs was always legal, but the industry was self-regulated and voluntarily did not do much advertising on television... but lets face it, TV has become the most powerful medium in the world (yes, much more powerful than Internet advertising) and in an effort to achieve ever-increasing profits, they slowly began advertising on television.
Most people don't realize this, but there are very, very few products that cannot be advertised on television or in the broadcast medium. The only one that comes to mind is cigarette advertising. As long as it is a legal drug, it can be advertised. Of course the FDA keeps a close watch on pharmaceutical advertising, and the FTC makes sure that there is at least some truth in the advertising (unlike political ads which do not follow under the FTC guidelines, and, consequently, can be as dishonest as the advertiser or politician deems necessary).
2006-11-10 13:53:08 · answer #2 · answered by ron s 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Not sure , but whenever they started doing it the companies have taken it to an unbelievable level. It must be having some positive affects on sales. I tell you when they go through the list of symptoms there is always one or two that seem to fit what is going on with you even if you were feeling great 10 seconds before the commercial runs. It really is annoying. Are there really that many guys out there that have erectile dysfunction.
2006-11-10 13:14:40 · answer #3 · answered by messtograves 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Around here it's fairly common. When our current governor was running for office, some of his writing which was anti-women's rights was published. His campaign immediately used his grown female children to talk about how he had encouraged them to be the best that they could be. It worked for him, and he was elected. But she was an adult capable of making her own decisions. Then there are the people like Sarah Palin. The introduction of her family during her vice presidential run didn't work out so well for her, and it opened her children to extreme scrutiny and damaged her chances of winning the election. I think she made a big mistake when she used her own infant son in her speech about "death panels." I think it's a risk not worth taking. I always admired the Clintons for sheltering Chelsea during their their careers in politics until she was old enough to make her own decisions. The Bushes and the Obamas seem to have taken a page from the Clinton playbook on this one. The only time you see them is in very controlled and sweet family scenes. They are not a part of Washington politics.
2016-05-22 04:04:18 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think it started around 1987 and before that there was a voluntary ban that the drug companies just decided to break. A law was passed by congress in 87 which set guidelines, and suddenly, the drug makers started direct marketing.
2006-11-10 13:11:08 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
No, tragically, it was before my time.
2006-11-10 13:07:38 · answer #6 · answered by Strange Design 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋