Re:Opioid epidemic costs West Virginia $8.8B annually, study...
by Jedd on Sunday February 11, 2018 @07:39AM
(#16352435)
> Look at my other post. I'm sourcing actual data that shows benefits and drawbacks. Care to source something to back up your claims?
My reply to your comment came before your 'other posts' .. consequently they were not taken into account during my reply. I note that your 'other post' points to a link at the US FDA that includes this caveat:
"It has come to our attention that readers may be projecting these results beyond the surveyed samples. We remind readers that this was designed to be an exporatory look at this issue. We caution readers that these analyses were not weighted back to the population."
> You realize that a decent amount of DTC in the US is around disease awareness and not a specific product, right?
I am not, and I would welcome a breakdown of the ratio of public-service non-sponsored content vs 'specific product' advertisement ... if indeed such a separation could be determined.
This is of course allowing for a large leeway of 'disease awareness' versus 'drug marketing' differentiation.
> BTW - NZ allows for DTC the last I heard.
"Such industry funded ‘health information’ campaigns have been banned in almost all industrialised countries since the 1940s. New Zealand and the United States are lonely exceptions.
"To what does New Zealand owe this dubious honour? While most other developed countries enacted legislation prohibiting this practice approximately three quarters of a century ago, the New Zaland Medicines Act 1981 failed to address DTCA, seemingly more by accident than design."
My reply to your comment came before your 'other posts' .. consequently they were not taken into account during my reply. I note that your 'other post' points to a link at the US FDA that includes this caveat:
"It has come to our attention that readers may be projecting these results beyond the surveyed samples. We remind readers that this was designed to be an exporatory look at this issue. We caution readers that these analyses were not weighted back to the population."
> You realize that a decent amount of DTC in the US is around disease awareness and not a specific product, right?
I am not, and I would welcome a breakdown of the ratio of public-service non-sponsored content vs 'specific product' advertisement ... if indeed such a separation could be determined.
This is of course allowing for a large leeway of 'disease awareness' versus 'drug marketing' differentiation.
> BTW - NZ allows for DTC the last I heard.
"Such industry funded ‘health information’ campaigns have been banned in almost all industrialised countries since the 1940s. New Zealand and the United States are lonely exceptions.
"To what does New Zealand owe this dubious honour? While most other developed countries enacted legislation prohibiting this practice approximately three quarters of a century ago, the New Zaland Medicines Act 1981 failed to address DTCA, seemingly more by accident than design."
(from https://www.nzma.org.nz/journal/read-the-journal/all-issues/... )
So that's an accidental 2m pro-people for your argument.