Insurance and pharma companies are naturally at odds. The government's role, if any, should be to turn that tension into something positive, i.e. careful discussion of the pros and cons of various drugs.
I agree that the FDA is in need of serious reform, but I wouldn't want to go back to the pre-FDA days when drugs could be sold without any testing or even disclosure of contents. As for having insurance companies evaluate drugs - since they pay for the drugs, their incentive is to approve as few as possible - I can't think of a bigger conflict of interest! There are already way too many insurance companies denying much needed treatment.
Insurance companies also compete for customers, so can't just deny everything. Without them, there is nobody incentivized to take a hard look at a treatment and say "this is useless and we aren't paying." America is over-treated, and structural factors need to change.
I'm sure there are people out there whose lives have been saved by grey-market antibiotics. FDA did not help them.
I'm not following your logic on the grey-market antibiotic comment. If somebody chooses to take a drug which may or may not be authentic, and which may or may not be contaminated, that's on them, not the FDA. I'll stick with the FDA approved drugs which I know have been tested via RCT's. I don't know why anybody would take a grey-market antibiotic unless they can't afford the real deal, which is definitely a huge problem in this country. But the FDA does not regulate drug prices, so that's also not on them. (It's on Big Pharma and PBM's, and the politicians who let them get away with it). I also don't believe it's the responsibility of the insurance companies to determine whether a treatment is effective or not, because they are not doctors, and they have a HUGE conflict of interest. That is the responsibility of medical professionals (and yes, second opinions are always good), along with the patients themselves. It's not that hard to do the research on PubMed and/or ClincalTrials.gov. If you think insurance companies will always pay for treatment you need, well, good luck with that. You may want to take a look:
It can be difficult to access antibiotic prescriptions, especially for patients with mobility impairments. Not everyone can jump through the hoops that society puts up.
100% ... Not only using our tax money to advertise this poison, they use television programming (like the news) to endorse it too... It felt like I was in a sci fi movie when I saw big bird and Elmo plugging the jab ... Appalling
Constant advertising of an unnecessary product that has potential harm to innocent children felt very creepy and dark ... never again should this happen
Under the 2022 permission, any party can offer valuable consideration (cash or other rewards) to people who have been partly or fully vaccinated under the Government's national COVID-19 vaccination program, subject to the following conditions:
Maybe not "massive" sales increases, but a depressed person sitting at home, lonely, really, you don't think they see a "perky-person" ad for some psych drug and go ask their psych about it next time? Or someone with achy arthritic joints? Or some woman wanting easy BC? Think again!!! Human nature is highly prone to SUGGESTION--that is why Advertising Works!
ALL IN FOR HEAVY REAL REGULATION ON BIG PHARMA! They've become the Medical Industrial Complex!
But trust in media keeps dropping, so at least those companies are suffering consequences. With so much trampling of 1st amendment rights recently, I would not support speech restrictions, even for vile pharma businesses. Instead, "buyer beware" attitude and media skepticism should be taught in school.
So many great comments and info in this thread. My final take away is: Our country is full of citizens who are clueless. They don't understand the Constitution and they don't realize how corrupt our government really is. The ABC departments (FDA CDC NIH HHS CIA FBI etc) are all out of control and need dismantled and replaced. I fear it will never happen because our government schools are teaching our children what and how to think. If we can't get our citizens properly educated, and actively involved, we're doomed.
Thankfully, there really are still some Adults In the Room, and Children in Schools are not calling the shots, yet.
Instilled Fear -- and I go so far as to say this Plandemic induced a Mass-Consciousness PTSD that shall wane but never cease -- and a goodish amount of the Populace were almost begging for these shots --
and
Lack of Caring -- so many people are just either overwhelmed or just plain don't care about their fellow Spiritual Beings on this Earth Walk. (If you knew only knew how many times I was told "watch a YT video" when I asked for a little bit of human-to-human feedback . . . )
I deeply feel that RFK Jr. is on the track to being able to DISMANTLE the TLA Corruption in these now-loosely-United States. I pray for RFK Jr. to receive the Peace of Christ on his Once-In-A-Lifetime Mission such that he may succeed.
Yeas ago it became forbidden in Australia for pharmaceutical companies to provide doctors with pens, writing pads, etc, as these were seen to be "inducements" to prescribe.
How is it that the 96% of the TGA's funding which is derived from the pharmaceutical industry, as documented by you in the BMJ, is not considered an inducement, as well as direct marketing to consumers, which occurs surreptitiously in Australia despite being officially prohibited.
Additionally, direct lobbying to the media, politicians, shareholdings in social media, all ensure that no marketing opportunity is missed.
When I worked in (administrative) in clinics, Pharma Drug Reps would bring a "lunch table" for the docs along with the spread of drugs they were pushing . . .
I can see why banning pharmaceutical ads would be controversial. I wonder, are there any other advertisements that are banned, or would this be the first time in the US a private company is not allowed to advertise their product?
That's true. I just want to be cautious about being quick to ban advertisement in the name of "public health". I hope RFK maintains a high standard for banning this sort of speech, and he maintains consistency with prior regulations.
I believe pharma ads are a net detriment for society. I hate it. But a few bureaucrat should not have the power to judge what kind of messaging is a harmful and thus banned. Not too far off would be public health ads by government organizations, I hate those as much as pharma ads.
Ultimately, I fear what RFK is suggesting is not too different from a form of censorship in the name of public health, which would be ironic.
I may be wrong, and there may be precedent already set that makes it okay to ban pharma ads. e.g. I'm not sure if ads are protected like other kinds of speech.
There was a time - and in my lifetime - that one could NOT receive a vaccination of any kind without a physical examination, hence, a recommendation, from a qualified MD. If one was actively ill, one could NOT receive a vaccine.
Nothing in life is FREE.
Many are now paying a very high price - in health - for taking these shots.
Huh. I took five of them, and I've never been in better health. Still waiting for all those bad side effects....(the vaccine has been out of my system for a very long time, so not quite sure how that's going to happen). On the other hand, i know quite a few people still suffering the ill effects of a Covid infection, including those buried in the ground.
Even when one goes to buy, say, spray paints, the clerks have to check your ID/age. Maybe not the exact same thing, but still in the vein of protecting "public health," (i.e., the vulnerable.)
Largely, the VULNERABLE - Children, Mentally Challenged (of all ages) - need to be Protected. Otherwise, who are we?
ACTIVE FREEDOM OF CHOICE in one's personal advertising, esp. electronically, would be a decent solution to keeping freedom of advertising/speech intact. I know they have pseudo-ad choices now, but it needs to be DISTINCTIVELY-INFORMED pre-advertising--Pharma can spend some bucks on that Sort of like a GRAPHIC WARNING or RATINGS of MOVIES.
ONE VIABLE SOLUTION: HEAVILY TAX the advertisements themselves for PHARMA Ads,. That along with ACTIVE e-AD CHOICES would be, at the very least, a very interesting start.
ANTI-SMOKING RANT FOLLOWS:
SURGEON GENERAL WARNING: In 1964 -- almost 60 years ago -- the Gov acknowledged that cig smoking could cause lung cancer.
Check out all the '40s and '50s movies where CIGARETTES are almost CHARACTERS in the movies!
Smoking Cigarettes is (probably) THE SINGLEMOST WORST thing one can do as far as health is concerned!
Nicotine (and whatever else they've concocted in the cancer sticks) is HIGHLY ADDICTIVE and has been likened - by professionals - to the level of addiction to heroin.
Withdrawal from and total cessation of Nicotine Addiction feels like death.
JUST SO NO to Smoking!
And Vaping - there's an OMG!
After the Gov TLAs and nonprofit Lung Association(s), etc., spend nigh on a decade or more and m/billions of dollars on anti-smoking campaigns, the Gov then ACTUALLY ALLOWS the introduction of and advertisement of VAPING!
Physicians and Attorneys - Years ago, it was considered, although not illegal, per se, but unethical to "advertise." Now, that's all out the window, too.
Why would they advertise pharmaceutical products, when is well known that most have side effect and potentially could kill or cause organ failures? Should private companies be better protected than US citizens ?
Not a question of who should have more protection. More of a question of who gets to be the judge of what is allowed to be advertised or not.
I'm sure there are other things that are advertisements for non- pharmaceutical products that can cause harm to someone with little regulation. Maybe weed killers, or mosquito repellants, etc for example. Or sugary drinks, fast foods, ultraprocessed foods. What about vegan meat substitutes, for which depending on who you ask are also dangerous to health. Addictive computer games? Social media?
Who will be the ultimate judge of what the public can hear or not? The government?
1. On the one hand, I want to say "No, I don't think it's time to ban DTCA in America, I think it's WAY PAST TIME to ban DTCA!!! No, wait, actually we should NEVER have allowed it in the first place!!!"
2. On the other hand, in the last few years we have seen what can happen when one side of any issue controls the narrative by "banning" things that are not beneficial to THEM. Think "books", just for starters.
I don't have a solution, but I have a suggestion to consider. One thing we know about business, particularly Big Business (and especially Big Pharma), is that money matters. They will tell you anything they think you want to hear, but they won't actually DO anything unless it costs them money in expenses, or reduces income from sales. We must find a way to improve the legal system to allow consumers to easily and successfully sue companies for damages when people are injured or killed by drugs. Today there are so many roadblocks such as states setting a time limit that you can file a claim. If companies paid more in damages for drugs that injure and kill, they will, at best, stop making the drug, or at least raise the price due to litigation expenses enough that fewer people will buy the drug.
I was in pharma when DTC was being pushed. I'd worked with the FDA regularly in those years. It was corrupt THEN. When I realized that, on top of DTC, they were going to approve a Fentanyl patch and lollipop, a drug whose dangers I knew well as an anesthetic -- anesthesiologists essentially kill you with it then bring you back to life -- TSF -- I had to get out.
The FDA is a front org for pharma. It cannot be reformed. Everyone who's been a part of it the past three years needs to be in jail for genocide. The DOD owns the contracts of these jabs which are legally considered "countermeasures" -- aka bioweapons. The FDA provided a public charade of un"scientific" cover by giving their "authorizations" when they had literally no role in the roll out of these jabs other than manipulation of the public.
Kennedy is aiming WAY off the target with a mere "revolving door" "reform." The public needs to know the WHOLE TRUTH or his campaign is worse than pointless. It's providing cover for genocidal war crimes that are still ongoing, aided by this agency.
Listen To/Read RFK Jr.'s comments on the Gov's TLA Agencies being "a front" (your words) for the Mega Corporations they are supposed to be "regulating." Certainly, they are NOT agencies FOR Protecting We The People, as they were allegedly intended and designed for.
That being said: I have always felt that physicians/pharma were Government-sanctioned drug pushers. The line between them and "The Cartel" is blurry at best.
God: Grant me The Serenity to Accept the Things I Cannot Change,
SO LONG OVERDUE. In fact, we need to blow up these big pharma companies in Pfizer, Moderna, J&J and any peddling death drugs, being FDA approved through faulty and misleading (profit driven) "science". We need to arrest Bourla and the rest of the big pharma CEO's behind the biggest medical democide in human history...repurposing their wealth to fight the WEF...and HANG THE mRNA JAB PROMOTING CEO'S LIVE ON PPV.
If you haven't already...ummm, I think you're going to want to watch this one.
Dr. David Martin Exposes Timeline of The Biggest Democide in Recorded History; "COVID-19 Was An Act of biological warfare".
- EU Parliament, Covid Summit in Brussels, Belgium - May 2023
While I absolutely consider advertising toxic drugs to be a terrible thing. I also support freedom. Which means a company should be free to advertise it's products (even when they kill people). It's up to people to stop believing advertising.
Absolutely. Our government might look into the *harm* pharmaceutical companies are doing by pushing their drugs via advertising or manipulating the media by funding via advertising. But freedom is essential and we should be very, very careful of the government deciding what is "good" for us. (we might disagree! thus I'd prefer to err on the side of freedom)
Point very well taken. Censorship is OUT OF CONTROL. I am all for ABOLISHING so-called "moderators" and the very concepts of "hate speech," "terroristic threatening" and so-called "hate-crimes.." However, there is an enormous chasm when you're talking a corrupted multi-billion-dollar industry (maybe trillions?) with too few regs and far too much power as compared to, say, a Michelle Carter who (WRONGFULLY) did time because she texted her BF while he was trying to commit suicide.
It's a distinct Order of Magnitude that may well benefit from the application of the Beatitudes.
Yes, this gets to one of my points about how I'd like to see government work. Government may have a very valid role in protecting us from abuse by mega-corporations while leaving small businesses "unregulated".
So for example let's say an advertising campaign costs more than $1,000,000. Anyone should be able to push a button to "complain" about it and that would trigger an investigation to force the advertiser to justify their advertisement and assure the public that it isn't causing harm.
Of course nothing works when our government is "owned"/"run" by corrupt mega interests.
Push a button but with PUBLISHED JUSTIFICATION; otherwise, you're gonna have a whole lotta unjustified button-pushers.
The ULTIMATE SOLUTION - CHOICE, CHOICE and more CHOICE! As long as we all have Freedom of Choice - especially in the medical/bodily autonomy arena - there are far, far fewer problems, to almost none.
Yet, we do, as a CIVILIZED CARING SOCIETY (and I fear that's in jeopardy of death) need to recognize that there are many VULNERABLE people - and I mean psychologically - that truly need to be protected from Predator Corporations. For Real. Maybe the WORST KIND of Advertising--Scams--Getting vulnerable people (i.e., with lack of critical thinking skills) to fall for something, anything, to get their monies.
Yes, we as a society have a serious problem with predatory scams. I'm dealing with this all the time with my father. He trusts anyone so is an easy target for scams. But how do we protect our vulnerable people without creating tyranny like we just experienced with a whole bunch of governors and others implementing TYRANNY with the excuse that it was for our own good yet no actual justification (I've been deep in the statistics for COVID right from the start and it was OBVIOUS this was not a crisis).
Yes, ban big pharma from TV. Then go the extra mile and rescind the 1986 vaccine laws. Otherwise, we are going to be slaves to big pharma until they murder us all.
Abolish the FDA. After 100 years of politicians promising to do better, this is what we have.
It's not going to get better.
Insurance companies can evaluate drugs. They already crash-test cars.
yes, except insurance industries are in on the game.
Insurance and pharma companies are naturally at odds. The government's role, if any, should be to turn that tension into something positive, i.e. careful discussion of the pros and cons of various drugs.
Insurance companies are very well-known for denying payment for and thereby use of not only "experimental" drugs but also insanely expensive drugs.
They're maybe a bad guy but not necessarily in this arena.
I agree that the FDA is in need of serious reform, but I wouldn't want to go back to the pre-FDA days when drugs could be sold without any testing or even disclosure of contents. As for having insurance companies evaluate drugs - since they pay for the drugs, their incentive is to approve as few as possible - I can't think of a bigger conflict of interest! There are already way too many insurance companies denying much needed treatment.
https://library.weill.cornell.edu/about-us/snake oil -social media-drug-advertising-your-health/food-and-drug-administration-continued#:~:text=died in 1930.-,1906,, and liquors...”
Insurance companies also compete for customers, so can't just deny everything. Without them, there is nobody incentivized to take a hard look at a treatment and say "this is useless and we aren't paying." America is over-treated, and structural factors need to change.
I'm sure there are people out there whose lives have been saved by grey-market antibiotics. FDA did not help them.
I'm not following your logic on the grey-market antibiotic comment. If somebody chooses to take a drug which may or may not be authentic, and which may or may not be contaminated, that's on them, not the FDA. I'll stick with the FDA approved drugs which I know have been tested via RCT's. I don't know why anybody would take a grey-market antibiotic unless they can't afford the real deal, which is definitely a huge problem in this country. But the FDA does not regulate drug prices, so that's also not on them. (It's on Big Pharma and PBM's, and the politicians who let them get away with it). I also don't believe it's the responsibility of the insurance companies to determine whether a treatment is effective or not, because they are not doctors, and they have a HUGE conflict of interest. That is the responsibility of medical professionals (and yes, second opinions are always good), along with the patients themselves. It's not that hard to do the research on PubMed and/or ClincalTrials.gov. If you think insurance companies will always pay for treatment you need, well, good luck with that. You may want to take a look:
https://www.propublica.org/article/cigna-pxdx-medical-health-insurance-rejection-claims
AND
https://www.propublica.org/article/unitedhealth-healthcare-insurance-denial-ulcerative-colitis
It can be difficult to access antibiotic prescriptions, especially for patients with mobility impairments. Not everyone can jump through the hoops that society puts up.
I do love listening to the laundry list of side-effects of these drugs!
Ban Covid19 and other Jab advertising Now!
100% ... Not only using our tax money to advertise this poison, they use television programming (like the news) to endorse it too... It felt like I was in a sci fi movie when I saw big bird and Elmo plugging the jab ... Appalling
Constant advertising of an unnecessary product that has potential harm to innocent children felt very creepy and dark ... never again should this happen
I think it technically is normally banned in Australia but they have an exemption/permission:
https://www.tga.gov.au/resources/resource/guidance/communicating-about-covid-19-vaccines
This part is also interesting:
“Offering rewards
Under the 2022 permission, any party can offer valuable consideration (cash or other rewards) to people who have been partly or fully vaccinated under the Government's national COVID-19 vaccination program, subject to the following conditions:
(…)”
DTCA does not lead to massive sales increases, but it does lead to media capture by Big Pharma.
Maybe not "massive" sales increases, but a depressed person sitting at home, lonely, really, you don't think they see a "perky-person" ad for some psych drug and go ask their psych about it next time? Or someone with achy arthritic joints? Or some woman wanting easy BC? Think again!!! Human nature is highly prone to SUGGESTION--that is why Advertising Works!
ALL IN FOR HEAVY REAL REGULATION ON BIG PHARMA! They've become the Medical Industrial Complex!
But trust in media keeps dropping, so at least those companies are suffering consequences. With so much trampling of 1st amendment rights recently, I would not support speech restrictions, even for vile pharma businesses. Instead, "buyer beware" attitude and media skepticism should be taught in school.
So many great comments and info in this thread. My final take away is: Our country is full of citizens who are clueless. They don't understand the Constitution and they don't realize how corrupt our government really is. The ABC departments (FDA CDC NIH HHS CIA FBI etc) are all out of control and need dismantled and replaced. I fear it will never happen because our government schools are teaching our children what and how to think. If we can't get our citizens properly educated, and actively involved, we're doomed.
The lack of knowledge on laws and our Constitution is astounding. I know, I teach college freshmen history and political science.
The Great Awakening is happening. Keep looking to Heaven and proclaim victory
Thankfully, there really are still some Adults In the Room, and Children in Schools are not calling the shots, yet.
Instilled Fear -- and I go so far as to say this Plandemic induced a Mass-Consciousness PTSD that shall wane but never cease -- and a goodish amount of the Populace were almost begging for these shots --
and
Lack of Caring -- so many people are just either overwhelmed or just plain don't care about their fellow Spiritual Beings on this Earth Walk. (If you knew only knew how many times I was told "watch a YT video" when I asked for a little bit of human-to-human feedback . . . )
I deeply feel that RFK Jr. is on the track to being able to DISMANTLE the TLA Corruption in these now-loosely-United States. I pray for RFK Jr. to receive the Peace of Christ on his Once-In-A-Lifetime Mission such that he may succeed.
Yeas ago it became forbidden in Australia for pharmaceutical companies to provide doctors with pens, writing pads, etc, as these were seen to be "inducements" to prescribe.
How is it that the 96% of the TGA's funding which is derived from the pharmaceutical industry, as documented by you in the BMJ, is not considered an inducement, as well as direct marketing to consumers, which occurs surreptitiously in Australia despite being officially prohibited.
Additionally, direct lobbying to the media, politicians, shareholdings in social media, all ensure that no marketing opportunity is missed.
Agree, although Australia bans DTCA, doctors are still exposed to drug ads in the Australian Doctor magazines. It’s insidious.
When I worked in (administrative) in clinics, Pharma Drug Reps would bring a "lunch table" for the docs along with the spread of drugs they were pushing . . .
Not exactly "continuing education."
Nailed it right there, great point.
Definitely. China did it 20 years ago.
Yes, and China is such a great democracy, let's just do whatever they do!
Then let it be as it is. 🤣 What do you know about China’s democracy? 🤣
It not legal here in Mexico and it’s enjoyable to not see those hundreds of ads!
I can see why banning pharmaceutical ads would be controversial. I wonder, are there any other advertisements that are banned, or would this be the first time in the US a private company is not allowed to advertise their product?
Good question. I’m not actually sure what other industries have restrictions and regulations.
They banned tobacco ads
That's true. I just want to be cautious about being quick to ban advertisement in the name of "public health". I hope RFK maintains a high standard for banning this sort of speech, and he maintains consistency with prior regulations.
I believe pharma ads are a net detriment for society. I hate it. But a few bureaucrat should not have the power to judge what kind of messaging is a harmful and thus banned. Not too far off would be public health ads by government organizations, I hate those as much as pharma ads.
Ultimately, I fear what RFK is suggesting is not too different from a form of censorship in the name of public health, which would be ironic.
I may be wrong, and there may be precedent already set that makes it okay to ban pharma ads. e.g. I'm not sure if ads are protected like other kinds of speech.
In PA our tax dollars went to promote a bunch of "free covid shots". Government should not be pushing it, imo
There was a time - and in my lifetime - that one could NOT receive a vaccination of any kind without a physical examination, hence, a recommendation, from a qualified MD. If one was actively ill, one could NOT receive a vaccine.
Nothing in life is FREE.
Many are now paying a very high price - in health - for taking these shots.
There are those that paid the ultimate price.
Peace.
Huh. I took five of them, and I've never been in better health. Still waiting for all those bad side effects....(the vaccine has been out of my system for a very long time, so not quite sure how that's going to happen). On the other hand, i know quite a few people still suffering the ill effects of a Covid infection, including those buried in the ground.
Five, huh?
Just wondering what MD would have Rxed that?
Still waiting for the bad, huh?
Careful what you wish for.
An occasional unsubstantiated anecdote does not negate substantial, serious real documentation.
BTW, "vaccines" do not move "out of your system."
Just not the way human immunology works..
Liquor advertising is regulated.
Advertising to children is regulated.
Even when one goes to buy, say, spray paints, the clerks have to check your ID/age. Maybe not the exact same thing, but still in the vein of protecting "public health," (i.e., the vulnerable.)
Largely, the VULNERABLE - Children, Mentally Challenged (of all ages) - need to be Protected. Otherwise, who are we?
ACTIVE FREEDOM OF CHOICE in one's personal advertising, esp. electronically, would be a decent solution to keeping freedom of advertising/speech intact. I know they have pseudo-ad choices now, but it needs to be DISTINCTIVELY-INFORMED pre-advertising--Pharma can spend some bucks on that Sort of like a GRAPHIC WARNING or RATINGS of MOVIES.
And Thank God for limiting/banning tobacco ads!
ONE VIABLE SOLUTION: HEAVILY TAX the advertisements themselves for PHARMA Ads,. That along with ACTIVE e-AD CHOICES would be, at the very least, a very interesting start.
ANTI-SMOKING RANT FOLLOWS:
SURGEON GENERAL WARNING: In 1964 -- almost 60 years ago -- the Gov acknowledged that cig smoking could cause lung cancer.
Check out all the '40s and '50s movies where CIGARETTES are almost CHARACTERS in the movies!
Smoking Cigarettes is (probably) THE SINGLEMOST WORST thing one can do as far as health is concerned!
Nicotine (and whatever else they've concocted in the cancer sticks) is HIGHLY ADDICTIVE and has been likened - by professionals - to the level of addiction to heroin.
Withdrawal from and total cessation of Nicotine Addiction feels like death.
JUST SO NO to Smoking!
And Vaping - there's an OMG!
After the Gov TLAs and nonprofit Lung Association(s), etc., spend nigh on a decade or more and m/billions of dollars on anti-smoking campaigns, the Gov then ACTUALLY ALLOWS the introduction of and advertisement of VAPING!
UNBELIEVEABLE!
"Mars Attacks!"
Pornography is heavily regulated.
Physicians and Attorneys - Years ago, it was considered, although not illegal, per se, but unethical to "advertise." Now, that's all out the window, too.
Why would they advertise pharmaceutical products, when is well known that most have side effect and potentially could kill or cause organ failures? Should private companies be better protected than US citizens ?
Not a question of who should have more protection. More of a question of who gets to be the judge of what is allowed to be advertised or not.
I'm sure there are other things that are advertisements for non- pharmaceutical products that can cause harm to someone with little regulation. Maybe weed killers, or mosquito repellants, etc for example. Or sugary drinks, fast foods, ultraprocessed foods. What about vegan meat substitutes, for which depending on who you ask are also dangerous to health. Addictive computer games? Social media?
Who will be the ultimate judge of what the public can hear or not? The government?
My philosophy is, if there is an ad on anything on TV, then it is muted and presumed to ‘lies, lies and more damned lies’.
Excellent piece!
I have to say I'm conflicted on this:
1. On the one hand, I want to say "No, I don't think it's time to ban DTCA in America, I think it's WAY PAST TIME to ban DTCA!!! No, wait, actually we should NEVER have allowed it in the first place!!!"
2. On the other hand, in the last few years we have seen what can happen when one side of any issue controls the narrative by "banning" things that are not beneficial to THEM. Think "books", just for starters.
I don't have a solution, but I have a suggestion to consider. One thing we know about business, particularly Big Business (and especially Big Pharma), is that money matters. They will tell you anything they think you want to hear, but they won't actually DO anything unless it costs them money in expenses, or reduces income from sales. We must find a way to improve the legal system to allow consumers to easily and successfully sue companies for damages when people are injured or killed by drugs. Today there are so many roadblocks such as states setting a time limit that you can file a claim. If companies paid more in damages for drugs that injure and kill, they will, at best, stop making the drug, or at least raise the price due to litigation expenses enough that fewer people will buy the drug.
Just a thought.
Close to the top of my pet peeve list!!!!
I was in pharma when DTC was being pushed. I'd worked with the FDA regularly in those years. It was corrupt THEN. When I realized that, on top of DTC, they were going to approve a Fentanyl patch and lollipop, a drug whose dangers I knew well as an anesthetic -- anesthesiologists essentially kill you with it then bring you back to life -- TSF -- I had to get out.
The FDA is a front org for pharma. It cannot be reformed. Everyone who's been a part of it the past three years needs to be in jail for genocide. The DOD owns the contracts of these jabs which are legally considered "countermeasures" -- aka bioweapons. The FDA provided a public charade of un"scientific" cover by giving their "authorizations" when they had literally no role in the roll out of these jabs other than manipulation of the public.
Kennedy is aiming WAY off the target with a mere "revolving door" "reform." The public needs to know the WHOLE TRUTH or his campaign is worse than pointless. It's providing cover for genocidal war crimes that are still ongoing, aided by this agency.
God bless you for staying ethical and having courage to do the the right thing in midst of a swamp !
Kennedy is right on STARTING POINT.
Listen To/Read RFK Jr.'s comments on the Gov's TLA Agencies being "a front" (your words) for the Mega Corporations they are supposed to be "regulating." Certainly, they are NOT agencies FOR Protecting We The People, as they were allegedly intended and designed for.
That being said: I have always felt that physicians/pharma were Government-sanctioned drug pushers. The line between them and "The Cartel" is blurry at best.
God: Grant me The Serenity to Accept the Things I Cannot Change,
The Courage to Change the Things I Can, and
The Wisdom to Know the Difference.
RFK All the Way!
SO LONG OVERDUE. In fact, we need to blow up these big pharma companies in Pfizer, Moderna, J&J and any peddling death drugs, being FDA approved through faulty and misleading (profit driven) "science". We need to arrest Bourla and the rest of the big pharma CEO's behind the biggest medical democide in human history...repurposing their wealth to fight the WEF...and HANG THE mRNA JAB PROMOTING CEO'S LIVE ON PPV.
If you haven't already...ummm, I think you're going to want to watch this one.
Dr. David Martin Exposes Timeline of The Biggest Democide in Recorded History; "COVID-19 Was An Act of biological warfare".
- EU Parliament, Covid Summit in Brussels, Belgium - May 2023
https://rumble.com/v2mwrgm--dr.-david-martin-documenting-coronavirus-gain-of-function-research-at-the-.html
Dr. David Martin's Presentation Sure Explains Fauci's Claims Back in 2017!!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=puqaaeLnEww
Operation Warp Speed? Pfizer patented the spike protein for a coronavirus vaccine over 30 years ago!
https://expose-news.com/2023/05/30/pfizer-patented-the-spike-protein-for-a-coronavirus/
While I absolutely consider advertising toxic drugs to be a terrible thing. I also support freedom. Which means a company should be free to advertise it's products (even when they kill people). It's up to people to stop believing advertising.
Just because something CAN be done does not mean it SHOULD be done.
Absolutely. Our government might look into the *harm* pharmaceutical companies are doing by pushing their drugs via advertising or manipulating the media by funding via advertising. But freedom is essential and we should be very, very careful of the government deciding what is "good" for us. (we might disagree! thus I'd prefer to err on the side of freedom)
Point very well taken. Censorship is OUT OF CONTROL. I am all for ABOLISHING so-called "moderators" and the very concepts of "hate speech," "terroristic threatening" and so-called "hate-crimes.." However, there is an enormous chasm when you're talking a corrupted multi-billion-dollar industry (maybe trillions?) with too few regs and far too much power as compared to, say, a Michelle Carter who (WRONGFULLY) did time because she texted her BF while he was trying to commit suicide.
It's a distinct Order of Magnitude that may well benefit from the application of the Beatitudes.
Yes, this gets to one of my points about how I'd like to see government work. Government may have a very valid role in protecting us from abuse by mega-corporations while leaving small businesses "unregulated".
So for example let's say an advertising campaign costs more than $1,000,000. Anyone should be able to push a button to "complain" about it and that would trigger an investigation to force the advertiser to justify their advertisement and assure the public that it isn't causing harm.
Of course nothing works when our government is "owned"/"run" by corrupt mega interests.
Push a button but with PUBLISHED JUSTIFICATION; otherwise, you're gonna have a whole lotta unjustified button-pushers.
The ULTIMATE SOLUTION - CHOICE, CHOICE and more CHOICE! As long as we all have Freedom of Choice - especially in the medical/bodily autonomy arena - there are far, far fewer problems, to almost none.
Yet, we do, as a CIVILIZED CARING SOCIETY (and I fear that's in jeopardy of death) need to recognize that there are many VULNERABLE people - and I mean psychologically - that truly need to be protected from Predator Corporations. For Real. Maybe the WORST KIND of Advertising--Scams--Getting vulnerable people (i.e., with lack of critical thinking skills) to fall for something, anything, to get their monies.
Yes, we as a society have a serious problem with predatory scams. I'm dealing with this all the time with my father. He trusts anyone so is an easy target for scams. But how do we protect our vulnerable people without creating tyranny like we just experienced with a whole bunch of governors and others implementing TYRANNY with the excuse that it was for our own good yet no actual justification (I've been deep in the statistics for COVID right from the start and it was OBVIOUS this was not a crisis).
Yes, ban big pharma from TV. Then go the extra mile and rescind the 1986 vaccine laws. Otherwise, we are going to be slaves to big pharma until they murder us all.