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: 1969

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

Pinkus RL.
From Lydia Pinkham to Bob Dole: what the changing face of direct-to-consumer drug advertising reveals about the professionalism of medicine.
Kennedy Inst Ethics J 2002 Jun; 12:(2):141-58
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=12476915


Abstract:

From its founding in 1847, the AMA divided drugs into “ethical” and “unethical” preparations. Those that were ethical had a known composition and were advertised only to the profession. Other, patent medicines (technically proprietary drugs, whose trademarks were protected by copyright), were sold directly to the public. In spite of the AMA’s efforts to ban the advertising and sale of those nostrums, proprietary drugs flourished during the nineteenth century. Starting in 1900, however, three major societal trends combined to bolster the AMA’s campaign, and by 1920 almost all advertising was directed to physicians, who would then prescribe medications to their patients. This ban on advertising pharmaceuticals directly to the public remained virtually unchanged until approximately 1980. Since then, it has slowly eroded and, as recently as 1997, the FDA created guidelines for pharmaceutical companies to advertise on television. What does this change say about the profession of medicine, the role of the physician in society, and the doctor-patient relationship? Using a comparative historical approach, this paper examines these issues.

Keywords:
Advertising/ethics* Advertising/history Advertising/legislation & jurisprudence Advertising/standards* American Medical Association Complementary Therapies Consumer Participation* Drug Industry/economics* Drug Industry/ethics* Drug Industry/history Drug Industry/legislation & jurisprudence Ethics, Medical Government Regulation History, 19th Century* History, 20th Century* Humans Interprofessional Relations Journalism Pharmaceutical Preparations/economics* Pharmaceutical Preparations/history Physician's Role*/history Physician-Patient Relations Professional Autonomy Quackery/history Sociology, Medical/history* United States United States Food and Drug Administration *analysis United States FDA Food and Drug Administration American Medical Association history ethical drugs patent medicines DTCA direct-to-consumer advertising doctor-patient relationship ATTITUDES REGARDING PROMOTION: HEALTH PROFESSIONALS ATTITUDES REGARDING PROMOTION: REGULATORS AND GOVERNMENT INFLUENCE OF PROMOTION: DOCTOR-PATIENT RELATIONSHIP INFLUENCE OF PROMOTION: PROFESSIONALISM INFORMATION FROM INDUSTRY: PATIENTS AND CONSUMERS PROMOTION AS A SOURCE OF INFORMATION: CONSUMERS AND PATIENTS PROMOTIONAL TECHNIQUES: DIRECT-TO-CONSUMER ADVERTISING REGULATIONS, CODES, GUIDELINES: DIRECT GOVERNMENT REGULATION

 

  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