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: 3132

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

'Opren scandal'
Lancet 1983 Jan 29;1(8318):219-20 1983 Jan 29; 1:(8318):219-20


Abstract:

Two episodes of the BBC show Panorama gave a wide range of evidence that alleged that a combination of unscrupulous marketing by Eli Lilly, biased research and gullible doctors had lead to 60 deaths from the drug benoxaprofen (Oraflex, Opren).

Keywords:
Advertising* Anti-Inflammatory Agents/adverse effects* Biomedical Research* Drug Industry Ethics, Pharmacy* Great Britain Humans Propionates/adverse effects* Propionic Acids/adverse effects* Public Opinion *editorial/United Kingdom/Eli Lilly/benoxaprofen/Opren and Oraflex/relationship between medical profession and industry/regulation of promotion/direct-to-consumer advertising/conflict of interest/drug company sponsored research/DTCA/ETHICAL ISSUES IN PROMOTION: PAYMENT FOR MEALS, ACCOMODATION, TRAVEL, ENTERTAINMENT/PROMOTION DISGUISED: CONFERENCES AND MEETINGS/PROMOTIONAL TECHNIQUES: 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








Cases of wilful misrepresentation are a rarity in medical advertising. For every advertisement in which nonexistent doctors are called on to testify or deliberately irrelevant references are bunched up in [fine print], you will find a hundred or more whose greatest offenses are unquestioning enthusiasm and the skill to communicate it.

The best defence the physician can muster against this kind of advertising is a healthy skepticism and a willingness, not always apparent in the past, to do his homework. He must cultivate a flair for spotting the logical loophole, the invalid clinical trial, the unreliable or meaningless testimonial, the unneeded improvement and the unlikely claim. Above all, he must develop greater resistance to the lure of the fashionable and the new.
- Pierre R. Garai (advertising executive) 1963