3 ms·
Yes. The problem is allowing pharmaceutical products to be advertised directly to consumers. That’s only legal in 2 countries — https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Di
by sonofhans 5y ago
Yes. The problem is allowing pharmaceutical products to be advertised directly to consumers. That’s only legal in 2 countries — https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct-to-consumer_advertising https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct-to-consumer_advertising
As a consequence, many large drug companies spend more money marketing drugs than developing them — https://www.raps.org/news-and-articles/news-articles/2019/7/do-biopharma-companies-really-spend-more-on-market https://www.raps.org/news-and-articles/news-articles/2019/7/...
- listenallyall 5y agoBut if there wasn't an opportunity to market them directly to people, many drugs would never have been made at all.
- sonofhans 5y agoExcellent. I would argue strongly that it’s an anti-pattern if literally the only way to sell a drug is to market it to people directly. This is the essence of consumer marketing — it only fulfills needs that it first creates, e.g., “Your breath is disgusting and people mock you behind your back, so use this mouthwash.”
- listenallyall 5y agoThat's kind of the default, "let's be cynical", viewpoint, don't you think? Some people do have awful breath. Lots of old men couldn't get an erection. Certainly you aren't claiming that diabetes, arthritis, or depression are not a real issues to be treated? Today I saw a commercial for a shingles vaccine. All I know about shingles is that David Letterman got it and it kept him off the air for a while and he said it was miserable. I'd certainly consider getting a vaccine.