• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Senators Propose Ban on Drug Advertising to Consumers

The left wants a socialist state. Something that has never worked and always has that little elite group at the top with the money and the power telling the rest of us what they should have and can have.
 
multivita-man said:
Will disagree on this one. The doctor is the person who is actually looking at test results and physically evaluating the patient in person. The doctor has the patient's medical history and information about the patient's general wellbeing and any medications and supplementation they're taking. A doctor is providing information based on his expertise and what he knows about the patient's situation. Generally speaking, in this sort of provider-consumer relationship, you want the provider to the one driving the consumptive behavior, not the other way around.
Click to expand...

Both can happen - the advertisement to raise awareness and then the steps a physician would take to determine suitability for their patient.
 
Big pharma doesnt really care about the advertising. It's all about buying off the media companies so they won't report anything critical about big pharma.

 
Cameron said:
I agree with all of that, I guess I just think banning direct-to-consumer advertising puts consumers more at the mercy of salesman/drug-pushing doctors. They are less likely to be aware of and ask their doctors about alternative options.

I'd rather ban the other kind of advertising you are talking about.
Click to expand...
I would agree if the majority of people weren't wholly unqualified to have an opinion on the subject. And those that are - the people who bother to educate themselves and take an active part in managing their own healthcare - aren't getting their info from commercials.
 
Last edited:
NOLA Dude said:
Lol
Click to expand...

Banning drug ads is government censorship of legal speech. If a pharmaceutical company is selling a state-approved drug, it has every right to advertise it. As consumers we deserve access to information - not just what mommy government approves of. A ban treats adults like children and you can bet it won't stop with just drugs.
 
aociswundumho said:
Banning drug ads is government censorship of legal speech. If a pharmaceutical company is selling a state-approved drug, it has every right to advertise it. As consumers we deserve access to information - not just what mommy government approves of. A ban treats adults like children and you can bet it won't stop with just drugs.
Click to expand...
The advertising is done to bribe the media companies not to report anything negative about big pharma and thats why just about every country in the world doesn't allow it.

The ads are ridiculous and usually most people have no idea what products the commercials are for. What drug makes you dance, parade in the street or walk your dog in the park because that's what the last 3 commercials I saw showed?
 
Integrityrespec said:
The left wants a socialist state. Something that has never worked and always has that little elite group at the top with the money and the power telling the rest of us what they should have and can have.
Click to expand...
Right wing bs
 
Integrityrespec said:
Healthcare is a business. All business is profit driven. Why we dont' want government running it? Because they don't run anything very well, waste money, favor their donors, and pay far too much for everything. The only true business the government runs is the USPS and it's always in debt and mismanaged.
Click to expand...
Which makes its incentive to not improve health since that affects its profits.
 
NOLA Dude said:
Bernie Sanders and Angus King co-sponsor a bill that would prohibit consumer drug ads, echoing calls by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. during his presidential campaign

Sens. Bernie Sanders (I., Vt.) and Angus King (I., Maine) introduced a bill Thursday that would ban pharmaceutical manufacturers from using direct-to-consumer advertising, including social media, to promote their products.

The bill would prohibit any promotional communications targeting consumers, including through television, radio, print, digital platforms and social media. It will apply to all prescription drug advertisements.

“The American people don’t want to see misleading and deceptive prescription drug ads on television,” Sanders said in a statement. “They want us to take on the greed of the pharmaceutical industry and ban these bogus ads.”


Bravo to Sanders and King! This should be a bipartisan issue. Only one other country in the world allows pharmaceutical advertising on television.
Click to expand...
I like it. Doctors should tell patients what medications would help, not patients telling their doctors they need something because they saw a slick add produced by the pharmecutical company that is trying to increase sales to maximize proffit not to help.patients.
 
I don't have a strong opinion on this. I suppose I support it but mainly because those advertisements are annoying and weirdly ironic as they show happy smiling people while the voice over lists 20 horrific maladies that are side effects of the drug. Then again, that part is somewhat entertaining and if the advertisements were banned, I'd lose that source of entertainment.

On the flip side I'm struggling to understand the legal basis for banning such advertising.
 
phoenix2020 said:
I don't have a strong opinion on this. I suppose I support it but mainly because those advertisements are annoying and weirdly ironic as they show happy smiling people while the voice over lists 20 horrific maladies that are side effects of the drug. Then again, that part is somewhat entertaining and if the advertisements were banned, I'd lose that source of entertainment.

On the flip side I'm struggling to understand the legal basis for banning such advertising.
Click to expand...
Yeah, seeing people frolicking on the beach while a voiceover lists the sometimes fatal side effects at 1.5x speed to a cheerful song has its entertainment value.
;)
 
aociswundumho said:
Yes.
Click to expand...
Then there are countries without a mommy government, where she says "you're on your own kiddos!" then you're fighting jerk baby daddy warlords coming to eat your lunch every day and take a dump on your front porch. Have you lived in that kind of environment to give us first hand information on the trade offs?
 
ElChupacabra said:
Then there are countries without a mommy government, where she says "you're on your own kiddos!" then you're fighting jerk baby daddy warlords coming to eat your lunch every day and take a dump on your front porch. Have you lived in that kind of environment to give us first hand information on the trade offs?
Click to expand...

I see, so you're trading off a shitting warlord for a mommy government.
 
aociswundumho said:
No it isn't. Something like 3/4 of all democrats have a positive view of socialism and for the left it's 100%.

Hence it is not unreasonable to presume the left wants a socialist state.
Click to expand...
Elite group at the top blah blah blah the whole post was just right wing vague bs
And irrelevant
 
BirdinHand said:
Fully support this

No other country has direct to consumer pharmaceutical advertising - and this would decrease expenditures by pharmaceutical companies significantly and therefore, also (hypothetically) help decrease the cost to consumers for pharmaceuticals.
Click to expand...
If there is a good reason to do this, it is NOT to decrease their expenditures so that they can pass the savings on to consumers. Have you looked at their profit margins of late, over the last two decades? If there is 2025 naivete award, congratulations, you have won it.
 
aociswundumho said:
Banning drug ads is government censorship of legal speech. If a pharmaceutical company is selling a state-approved drug, it has every right to advertise it. As consumers we deserve access to information - not just what mommy government approves of. A ban treats adults like children and you can bet it won't stop with just drugs.
Click to expand...
Ya might have a point re: censorship if I could control what commercials I'm subjected to but I can't.

As to information? The information content of most of these approaches 0.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom