« 
Tancredo Retiring From Congress | Home | 
Poll: Romney Dominating Iowa GOP, Edwards Down And Obama Up With Dems »
Tancredo Retiring From Congress | Home | Poll: Romney Dominating Iowa GOP, Edwards Down And Obama Up With Dems »
Edwards Proposes Two-Year Waiting Period For Drug Advertising
John Edwards has proposed a two-year waiting period before pharmaceutical companies would be able to begin advertising new drugs directly to consumers.
Edwards noted that drug advertising has quadrupled to $4 billion in the ten years since the government liberalized the regulations on drug advertising, with top companies spending more on marketing and administration than they do on research and development.
"Basically, they do what they want, and they're driving up demand for the most expensive and most profitable drugs," Edwards told an Iowa crowd. "The next president needs to deal with this issue."
Advertisement
YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES!
Of course, this mean that Clinton will be receiving fist fulls of drug money . . .
October 29, 2007 9:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
Sounds very sensible to me.
October 29, 2007 10:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
Except....I'm really glad there are ads out there for the HPV vaccine. Young women should have the opportunity to protect themselves against cervical cancer and the ads help cut through the hysteria on the right about protecting women from the consequences of sexual activity.....
October 29, 2007 10:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
Why not just go back to how it was in the past? Who is helped by these annoying ads? It helps only the drug companies in order to boost sales by getting patients to nag doctors to try their products the same way they brainwash kids into nagging their parents for every piece of crap toy on tv. How much cheaper could drugs be if their manufacturers quit investing billions in ads?
October 29, 2007 12:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
So is Edwards saying that people don't have enough sense to evaluate whether they need a drug or not and are so shallow that they need to be protected against drug advertisements? If that is the case then maybe he should advocate protecting them against advertising for all products as well.
If Edwards wants to look at things that drive up the cost of drugs he should start by looking at streamlining the lengthy process that a drug has to go through before it can be approved for marketing rather than launching this quixotic assault on advertising.
John Edwards: the candidate of specifics on things that don't matter.
October 29, 2007 12:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
daniell55, the answer to your first question is unequivocally yes. WTF do you think doctors are for?
October 29, 2007 1:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Another day, another opportunity for Edwards to display what a complete tool he is. You either allow the ads, starting on the day they enter the market (which the drug companies want), or you ban them (for all of the reasons "oleeb" listed).
When Edwards says, "[T]hey're driving up demand for the most expensive and most profitable drugs", what does he think is going to happen to demand with drug ads (even after 2 years) PLUS his UHC plan? You don't think people who don't feel the out-of-pocket expense of their care aren't going to demand anything and everything they can con their doctor into giving them? Why would Edwards not be for a total ban on prescription drug ads?
What a TOOL!
October 29, 2007 8:45 PM | Reply | Permalink