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: 9642

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

McCarthy R.
Dingell subcommittee would ban physical sampling
American Druggist 1986 Jun; 193:12, 17


Abstract:

Major provisions of the proposed Prescription Drug Marketing Act of 1986 are presented. The Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee reporting on drug diversion and related matters unanimously agreed on the proposed drug sampling legislation, whereby manufacturers would supply physicians with coupons, which patients would redeem at pharmacies for free starter doses and which pharmacies would forward to manufacturers for reimbursement. All the manufacturers remain adamantly opposed to any system of sampling and are in favor of banning the reimportation of pharmaceuticals and making the resale of samples a felony. The Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Association favors a stronger code of behavior governing the distribution of samples such as requiring that samples be supplied only at the written request of the physicians.

 

  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