corner
Healthy Skepticism
Join us to help reduce harm from misleading health information.
Increase font size   Decrease font size   Print-friendly view   Print
Register Log in

Healthy Skepticism Library item: 17624

Warning: This library includes all items relevant to health product marketing that we are aware of regardless of quality. Often we do not agree with all or part of the contents.

 

Publication type: Journal Article

Foster JL
Perpetuating stigma? Differences between advertisements for psychiatric and non-psychiatric medication in two professional journals.
J Ment Health. 2010 Feb; 19:(1):26-33.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20380495


Abstract:

BACKGROUND: Continuing debates regarding advertising and the pharmaceutical industry, and others detailing the continued stigmatization of mental health problems. AIMS: To establish whether there are any differences in advertisements for psychiatric and non-psychiatric medication aimed at health professionals. METHOD: Quantitative (t-tests, Chi-squared) and qualitative analysis of all unique advertisements for medication that appeared in two professional journals (the British Medical Journal and the British Journal of Psychiatry) between October 2005 and September 2006 was undertaken. Close attention was paid to both images and text used in the advertisements. RESULTS: Significant differences were found between advertisements for psychiatric and non-psychiatric medication in both quantitative and qualitative analysis: advertisements for psychiatric medication contain less text and are less likely to include specific information about the actual drug than non-psychiatric medication advertisements; images used in advertisements for psychiatric medication are more negative than those used for non-psychiatric medication, and are less likely to portray people in everyday situations. CONCLUSION: A distinction between mental health problems and other forms of ill health is clearly being maintained in medication advertisements; this has potentially stigmatizing consequences, both for professional and public perceptions. There are also troubling implications in light of the debates surrounding Direct to Consumer Advertising.

 

  Healthy Skepticism on RSS   Healthy Skepticism on Facebook   Healthy Skepticism on Twitter

Please
Click to Register

(read more)

then
Click to Log in
for free access to more features of this website.

Forgot your username or password?

You are invited to
apply for membership
of Healthy Skepticism,
if you support our aims.

Pay a subscription

Support our work with a donation

Buy Healthy Skepticism T Shirts


If there is something you don't like, please tell us. If you like our work, please tell others.

Email a Friend








Far too large a section of the treatment of disease is to-day controlled by the big manufacturing pharmacists, who have enslaved us in a plausible pseudo-science...
The blind faith which some men have in medicines illustrates too often the greatest of all human capacities - the capacity for self deception...
Some one will say, Is this all your science has to tell us? Is this the outcome of decades of good clinical work, of patient study of the disease, of anxious trial in such good faith of so many drugs? Give us back the childlike trust of the fathers in antimony and in the lancet rather than this cold nihilism. Not at all! Let us accept the truth, however unpleasant it may be, and with the death rate staring us in the face, let us not be deceived with vain fancies...
we need a stern, iconoclastic spirit which leads, not to nihilism, but to an active skepticism - not the passive skepticism, born of despair, but the active skepticism born of a knowledge that recognizes its limitations and knows full well that only in this attitude of mind can true progress be made.
- William Osler 1909