studies have shown studies come out the way the people who paid for them want them to.
| By Matthew Davis BBC News, Washington |
Turn on the television in the US and it will not be long before you are being sold the latest solution to anything from managing your menopause to beating your erectile dysfunction problem.
Drug manufacturers say such adverts - often comprising emotional testimony from sufferers - allow people to take control of their own health.
But as greater access to information continues to influence the relationship between doctor and patient, the quality of that information has become more important than ever.
Consumer groups and politicians have been getting increasingly concerned about the over-selling of the benefits, and under-selling of the risks, of prescription drugs.
Criticism grew into a chorus last year after safety scandals hit several heavily-advertised medications, including the pain-reliever Vioxx.
New code
In a sign of the continuing controversy over consumer ads, the industry's average monthly spending on them fell this month for the first time in six years, from $358m to $351m.
| | We must ask ourselves: 'Are these ads, which we know are costing billions, properly educating patients or just peddling expensive products?' Senator Bill Frist (R) |
At around the same time, the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America unveiled a set of voluntary codes designed to restore confidence.
The PhRMA says companies should pitch adult products at adult audiences and urges firms to fully educate doctors about new medicines before launching their ad campaigns.
Adverts should be clearer about the conditions the drug can treat - and the major risks involved, the PhRMA's code says.
PhRMA president Billy Tauzin says patients "need accurate and timely information and should be encouraged to discuss diseases and treatment options with their physicians".
But opponents say the move is just a sop, designed to stave off the prospect of Congress taking sterner, legislative action.
Rob Schneider, director of Consumers Union's prescription drug reform effort, www.PrescriptionForChange.org, said: "What we clearly need is more authority and resources to ensure that all marketing, not just the amount spent on direct-to-consumer advertising, is honest and accurate."
Patient demands
The leading Republican lawmaker in the Senate, Bill Frist, launched a recent broadside, calling for a two-year moratorium on advertising after a drug's launch, so any latent ill-effects can be picked up on.
He argues that "mindless drug advertising" is driving up the costs of medicines.
"Turn on your TV, and within 15 minutes you'll be bombarded by dreamy ads that suggestively over-promise and, even more likely, will make you and your children experts on erectile dysfunction," Mr Frist told the Commonwealth Club of California in San Francisco.
"We must ask ourselves: 'Are these ads, which we know are costing billions, properly educating patients or just peddling expensive products?'"
Drug advertising, he added, "leads patients to demand from their doctor drugs that they may not need or, even worse, that might expose them to risks they didn't know about".
Drug advertising has the potential to educate patients about the latest therapies.
Indeed, a recent study by the US Food and Drug Administration found ads increased awareness of new treatments, and that most doctors felt they helped discussions about health matters with their patients.
But the study also found that adverts unnecessarily increased patients' anxieties about their health, and that doctors felt under pressure to prescribe specific medicines.
Changing relationship
Doctors say that consumer ads increase demands from patients for specific medication - which may or may not be suitable for them to take.
In June, the American Medical Association voted to further study the issue because of "concerns about the effects of these ads on the patient-doctor relationship and health care costs".
The AMA supports patients' increased access to drug information, but "questions whether DTC drug advertising, designed to sell a product, provides the objective and accurate information patients need".
Dr Edward Langston, a family medicine practitioner and an AMA trustee, told the BBC: "There is a lot of information out there, but the difficulty is that patients don't know what is good and what is bad.
"Television advertising tends to give a very unbalanced view, an unrealistic expectation of what a drug can do, and how it can be used.
"The new guidelines are a great first step, but we will have to see how much discipline companies have."
---
hey morons, most of you passed the law in 1996 that allowed this propaganda of pills that do little to keep people well. or don't you remember? big pharma has plenty of pills to make you forget.
"ask your doctor if 'trademarked name' is right for you", that is utter crap. using crafted advertspeak to get around the 'legal claims' nonsense should be hint one. thereby calling anything ingestible not manufactured by big pharma as a 'supplement', and proceeding to pay off the legislature and the courts to ban as many as possible, hint two.
with all the kneejerk press methamphetamine has received, there is little mentioned about the painkiller problem this country faces. not that i'm for meth addicts, let's just keep it in perspective.
Virginians spend about $99 million each year to enforce state and local marijuana laws. What are taxpayers getting for their money? Not much, according to a recent study.
Jon B. Gettman, a senior fellow at George Mason University's School of Public Policy, prepared the study, titled "Crimes of Indiscretion: Marijuana Arrests in the United States," for the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws.
"Marijuana arrests," says Gettman, "are instruments of a supply-reduction policy. But, he adds, "The doubling of marijuana arrests in the 1990s has produced the opposite of the intended effect in every major indicator. An increase in arrests should produce a reduction in use and the availability of marijuana. However, during the 1990s both use and availability of marijuana increased."
Marijuana possession arrests in the U.S. totaled 260,000 in 1990. By 2003, that figure topped 662,000. Even failed public policies, however, can cost a bundle.
Virginians are, in effect, paying for Washington's marijuana prohibition policies. "The use of criminal law to control the availability and use of marijuana," says Gettman, "is a federal policy that is dependent on local law enforcement for its implementation." And state and local costs quickly add up.
A Boston University economics professor, Jeffrey A. Miron, estimates that state and local officials spend about $5 billion a year enforcing marijuana laws. Virginia's share is: $31 million for police services; $56 million for judicial services; $12 million for correctional services.
The thousands of persons arrested on marijuana possession charges in Virginia each year -- especially teenagers -- pay extra. "Marijuana arrests," Gettman stresses, "make criminals out of otherwise law-abiding citizens. Indeed, the primary consequence of marijuana arrests is the introduction of hundreds of thousands of young people into the criminal justice system."
Once a teenager has a criminal record, other penalties often follow. In Virginia, employers can ask job applicants about arrests, even arrests not leading to a conviction, and a criminal record may bar a person from public housing.
Taking a close look at marijuana arrest patterns, Gettman notes that young people are disproportionally targeted. "The brunt of marijuana law enforcement," he says, "falls on both adolescents and the youngest adults -- on teenagers." Nationally, almost 17 percent of all persons arrested for possession of marijuana were between 15 and 17 years old. Another 26 percent were age 18-20.
And what do Virginians get for these financial and personal costs? In 2002, there were 12,798 marijuana possession arrests in Virginia, but the number of users keeps going up. While 4 percent of Virginia's population was estimated to be monthly users in 1999, in 2002 the estimate stood at 6.4 percent. Nationally, monthly users went from 4.9 percent in 1999 to 6.2 percent in 2002.
The basic problem, says Gettman, is that the "Overall supply of marijuana in the U.S. is far too diversified to be controlled by law enforcement."
If the current marijuana policies are both costly and ineffective, what is the next best strategy? Because marijuana is so widely used, Gettman recommends treating marijuana like a pharmaceutical product subject to Federal Drug Administration testing and regulatory requirements.
By shifting to a policy that treats and taxes marijuana like tobacco and alcohol, Virginians could gain the following benefits: a decrease in illegal activities surrounding drug sales; government control of marijuana quality; better control of underage access to marijuana; and removal of the profit motive that attracts sellers, including a substantial number of teenage sellers who, most frequently, supply other teenagers.
On top of that, Miron estimates a marijuana sales tax would replace the $99 million a year Virginia taxpayers are now spending to enforce unenforceable laws, with a new revenue pipeline bringing in $20 million a year.
---
oh dear, a factual article. quick, get the ONDCP to go and spread another 'captain obvious misinformation' - the anti drug ad.
i don't like the proposal to let the FDA near medical cannabis. as if those human beings have not already been bought off by big pharma.
if this isn't pharma induced government pork, please tell me what it is.
| Vancouver Sun |
Vancouver pot crusader Marc Emery said Thursday he is prepared to spend 20 years in a U.S. prison in order to galvanize the marijuana legalization campaign, claiming it to be his life's work.
"Ultimately, if I have to be the sacrificial lamb then this is a good thing, if it gets people motivated," said Emery, 47, who is being held at the North Fraser Pretrial Centre in Port Coquitlam until his bail is posted.
"It's what I've always wanted to do -- make Canada free," he said.
"Ultimately, I'm fit and ready for battle."
Emery, the leader of B.C.'s Marijuana Party, was arrested July 29 along with two others on U.S. charges of conspiracy to distribute marijuana seeds, produce marijuana, and launder money. If extradited and convicted, Emery could be sentenced to between 10 years and life.
The charges stem from an 18-month-long investigation into Emery's marijuana seed distribution business, Marc Emery Direct, which was led by the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration with assistance from the Vancouver Police Department.
"Their [the VPD's] loyalty is to the police establishment first, and Canadians second," said Emery, who has been running his Hastings Street business since 1994.
"I thought we had carved out our territory in the 300 block of [West] Hastings Street as a safe place for our community."
His business was raided in 1997 by Vancouver police but no charges were laid, Emery said. Only recently did he suspect he might be under investigation.
"I realized [a few] weeks ago, when [a U.S. undercover agent] asked me over my cellphone for 10 pounds of marijuana," he said. "I told her that was a really stupid thing to do."
Shortly after, the undercover agent -- who went by the name Sarah -- visited Emery at his store with the same request.
"I lectured her," Emery said. "I told her that's not what I do.
"At that point, I thought that was a very strange conversation. So I thought perhaps the police were interested . . . but I [couldn't] let that deter me."
A few weeks later Emery, who says he smokes one or two joints a day, was arrested in Halifax.
Despite allegations that he laundered millions of dollars, Emery said he donated nearly all of the profits from his business -- between $3 and $4 million -- to marijuana-related activism.
Among his recent donations was $50,000 given to legalization campaigns in Nevada and Alaska.
"That's why I'm being targeted," he said, describing himself as "quite the irritant" for U.S. authorities.
According to statements made during his bail hearing, Emery pays $3,000 a month for his Vancouver apartment. But Emery said he does not own any assets or property.
"I don't need any possessions," he said. "I'm merely a conduit for possessions -- I'm not meant to handle them."
Emery, a father of four, said he also paid income tax -- about $380,000 over the past five years -- on his earnings from marijuana seed sales.
"The federal government was aware, because I told them," he said. "They said to me, 'You're the only guy that's ever admitted that.' The federal government is more complicit than I am by far."
However, Emery said his sales have declined lately because so many other seed distributors have opened. He estimates there are 50 marijuana seed sellers in Canada alone.
Marc Emery Direct, he says, was part of bigger plan to push the legalization campaign onto the front burner and "overgrow the government."
Emery, who has run for political office 10 times, including for Parliament in 1980, said he is looking forward to preparing his defence.
"The U.S. are engaged in a barbaric war," he said. "Canada needs someone to galvanize them, and I'm happy to be that conduit."
According to his lawyer, John Conroy, Emery is expected to be released Friday on bail of $50,000. The two others arrested July 29, Michelle Rainey-Fenkarek, 34, and Gregory Williams, 50, face the same charges. The next court date for all three is scheduled for Aug. 25.
bbadelt@png.canwest.com
