Direct Advertising of Schedule 4 Medicines to Consumers

Direct Advertising of Schedule 4 Medicines to Consumers Abduwaysi Amie Should Schedule 4 medicines be directly advertised to consumers? This essay will examine a number of arguments for and against direct advertising of Schedule 4 medicines to consumers, but it will argue that schedule 4 medicines should not be advertised directly to consumers. In the last decades advertising has grown and pharmaceutical companies are advertising directly to consumers. These days, consumers are facing the most advance and domesticated advertised about medicine. The research suggests that direct advertising to consumers is both beneficial and disadvantageous to public health in general. The TGA is the only authority that regulates direct advertising to consumers, advertisements for all therapeutic goods must comply with therapeutic good regulation act 1989. There are limits on direct advertisement product containing schedule 3,4and 8 to be advertised to consumers in Australia. Some groups of people argue the rules are too relaxed and are inadequate to enforce the Low that protects consumers ,others supporting direct advertise to consu mers (Mangin 2006), this number is evenly distributed and balanced , both side have been supporting their arguments with evidence. Currently there are a number of methods of advertising medicines to consumers. First type provides information to the consumers to seek treatment from their doctor about a particular problem without naming the drug. The second method is those which advertise their medicine directly to consumers by naming the drug, what it’s used for, how it used, how many tablets you take per days and the price of the drug. The last one is the common type of advertising, product claims such as efficacy, safety and quality of the drug. The entire drugs are subject to different TGA regulatory restriction.(Shaw March 2008) The Therapeutic Good Administration (TGA) is the branch of the Australian Department of Health and Aging, responsible for regulating therapeutic goods, prescription medicines, medical devices and non-prescription medicines including over the counter medicines in order to protect public health and safety. The TGA put in place the systems of national scheduling or classifying medicines to control medicines and chemicals that pose risks to consumers. Medicine is classified according to the level of risk. The TGA classified medicines and poison in to schedule from 1-9.† Schedule 4 (prescription only) medicines and Schedule 8 (drugs of addiction) is regulated by the Poisons Act 1964 and the Poisons Regulations 1965 State legislation). Schedule 4 medicines are Prescription only Medicine are defined by the poison act as this medicines are needed to be evaluated for safety and efficacy and for safe and appropriate use due to the complex nature of the medicine potential toxicity, compar ed with relatively safe over counter drug which do not require a prescription.(Health 2008) Under section 23(2) (e) together with substance or preparations intended for therapeutic use. The safety, quality and efficacy require further evaluation; the prescribing of certain S4 medicines is restricted to medical specialists in some cases Prescription of certain medicines to patients, who are suffering from chronic disease like skin disease and cancer. There are some drugs prescribe by dermatologist, gynaecologist that are restricted to medical practitioners.(C. Lee Ventola 2011) New Zealand and the United States of America are the only countries allowed direct advertising Schedule 4 medicines. This is not allowed by law in the most countries around the world including Australia. Direct advertisements to consumers failed to provide necessary information about the drug, instead they appeal and tend to sell and promote their products. It also contains misleading, inaccurate information.(Barbara Mintzes 2006) Today medicines are available in markets in two main forms in Australia, those required prescriptions from general practitioners and those you can buy directly without prescription(over the counter drug). Pharmaceutical companies can directly advertise to health professionals but not to the general public at all, this will affects the relationship that existed between patient and general practitioner. The health practitioners have good relation with their patients; they have also a legal responsibility in both prescribing the medicine and also informing the potential risk. In 21st t the century people attitude is changing the use of health services by accessing many range of information’s from the media. Restricting direct advertises schedule 4 medicines to consumers are justified due to safety concern. (Mangin 2006) For instance, the most recent evidences direct advertising can cause harm risk to consumer come from Vioxx. There was no enough evidence to suggest that Vioxx is more effective to treat arthritis pain and inflammation it has only benefited reduced risk of gastrointestinal effect. However the trail shows disadvantage outweighs the benefit which increases in heart attack and stroke. Many discussions have raised about the safety effects of direct advertising schedule 4 medicine to the consumer. The US cardiologist argued that the FDA has failed to stop direct advertising; Vioxx to US public, they failed to protect the public health and safety while cardiac risk grew. During those periods Merck has spent more than 500m illion for direct advertising their wonder drug to the world in its five years in the market. Vioxx case was one of the examples about the effects of direct advertising prescription medicine to the public and its potential impacts on individual patients and public health at large, based on the available evidence. Advertising schedule 4 medicine should be banned; it may expose people with serious medical problems. (Barbara Mintzes 2006)It is possible to change the law to safeguard the public from direct advertisement prescriptions medicine. The changes in policy about direct advertise prescription medicine to consumers can assist the connection between public advertising and public health. The people who are supporting direct advertising schedule 4 medicines to consumer argue that freedom of speech, commercial freedom, the right to get important information to consumers, In order to enable them to make a decision. They think direct advertising prescription medicine is very important human right, to know more information about a potential treatment for the disease they suffered from. They believe also access to their health information can be available to them with the availability of the drug, and (Assistant Professor The impact of advertising prescription medicines directly to consumers in New Zealand: lessons for Australia)information what is best for them. Defenders of direct advertise prescription medicine to consumers focused their campaign on the particular class of medicines that treat illness that symptom are already known to consumers. The defendant argues allowing direct advertise to consumers enablement and autonomy. The argument highlights the types patient who will benefit from direct advertise including the following, people those are poor who are an ability to have access health information, those who have temporary conditions, would prefer direct access information and those who have experience managing chronic pain and recurring long term conditions. In general, consumers who are adult they have capacity, entitled and right to make a decision about the products and good and services. The pharmaceutical company believes direct advertising to consumer has played important role in informing and educating the consumer about the condition that are treated by brand name drugs. Advertising schedule 4 medicines to consumers is undesirable because direct advertising does not provide necessary information about adverse effects, alternative treatments and the cost of drugs. According ED Mierzwinski, consumer program director for U.S PIRG.Direct advertising causes â€Å"over prescription of drug for condition people weren’t aware of it, has resulted in massive profit for the industry by preying on vulnerableconsumers† in addition, to discouragement doctor and patient relationship. This advertisement can give misleading information about the brand drug, exaggerate the benefits and under reporting the side effect or risk. The consumers that are exposed to direct advertising constantly think drug is the only solution to a health problem, instead of taking up healthy living, good diet and exercise. The result clearly shows, advertising new drug before fully known serious adverse effects, and current post market surveillance sometimes fails to identify adverse events that of a particular drug, which is heavily endorsed early in the process of production, which can present public health. Vioxx was such drug that mostly advertised in the U.S from 1999-2004. 4On September 30, 2004, Merck voluntarily withdrew Vioxx from the market. Before it withdrew patients requesting for Vioxx by asking the drug relying on the company advertisement they believe the Vioxx is better than other drugs treat the same conditions, not knowing that this drug can cause stroke or other heart problems. benoxaprofen (Oraflex, Eli Lilly) for arthritis, troglitazone (Rezulin, Parke-Davis) for diabetes, cisapride (Propulsid, Janssen) for gastric reflux, ceriva statin (Baycol, Bayer) for high cholesterol, and tegaserod (Zelnorm, Novartis) are other drugs that were heavily advertised to consumers, which have linked to safety risk. .(C. Lee Ventola 2011) Advertising has been the major tools of marketing to consumers for pharmaceutical companies. The profit generated by increasing spending on direct advertisement to consumer by pharmaceutical companies is the main driver of increasing prescription drug and raised the consumer expectation of drug treatment that influence both patients and doctors. The claim direct advertising can provide necessary information that could help the patients about the drug. It has been a point of discussion among patients, pharmaceutical companies and medical professionals in relation to direct advertisement to consumer.one group argues the knowledge from advertising may assist the patients in making decisions with their doctors to have a choice of treatment they need. Others argue advertising new drug to the consumer led to aggressive marketing of Vioxx the drug, which has been found unsafe and risk to consumers, such a case has put big pressure on FDA not to speed up the release of a new drug without pro per clinical trials. In recent times, more people have been calling for cessation of direct advertisement to safeguard consumers from unnecessary effects of direct advertisement and to put limits into misleading and false information. To improve access option for drug treatment, we need comprehensive, unbiased and accurate information. References Assistant Professor, DoP, Ryerson University, Toronto, Canada The impact of advertising prescription medicines directly to consumers in New Zealand: lessons for Australia, To ban or not to ban: direct-to-consumer advertising and human rights ( accessed 08/10 20140 Analysis , Australasian Medical Journal, vol. 2010,3,12, 749-766 pp. 2010,3,12, 749-766 2006, What are the Public Health Implications? ( accessed 09/10 20140 Direct- to- ConsumeAdvertising of PrescriptionDrugs in Canada, Barbara Mintzes, P, Health council of Canada. C. Lee Ventola, M 2011, Direct-to-Consumer Pharmaceutical Advertising( accessed 10/10 20140 Therapeutic or Toxic?’ U.S national library of medicine, National Institute of Health, vol. 36, no. 10 pp. 669-74, 81-84. Health, PSBDo 2008, Requirements for the prescribing , of Schedule 4 and Schedule 8( accessed 15/10 20140 Medicines in Western Australia WA Australia. Show, A March 2008, Direct-to- Consumer S Advertising (DTC) of Pharmaceuticals, Discovery Guides, 14/10/2014. ( accessed 10/10 20140

Introduction to Ethics & Social

Medicine at Tufts University, wrote a version of the oath that talks about how a doctor should care for the sick with compassion, humanely, and says nothing about working to get rich off of those who are suffering (Lasagna, 1964). In the United States, there should not be anyone who cannot see a doctor because they are poor; a doctor takes an oath to heal the sick wherever he can, not to heal the sick only if they are rich. If being alive is an inalienable right, as documented by the Declaration of Independence, would it not be common sense that healthcare would also be a right rather than a privilege?The United States is the only wealthy, industrialized nation that does not make sure that all of its citizens receive proper health coverage. In 2004 lack of coverage is estimated to have caused 18,000 deaths that have been considered unnecessary (loom. Due, 2004). It is common knowledge that if a parent has an extremely ill child, and refuses to take that child to the doctor, the paren t can be charged with neglect. If the child is the healthy one, and her single father is diagnosed with cancer, who will be charged with neglect when he dies for no other reason than he doesn't have insurance?Could you imagine being so desperate for health care that you were willing to commit a federal crime in the hopes of going to prison to get the care you need? Richard James Vernon handed a teller in an ROB Bank in Gaston, N. C. A note, claiming he had a gun but was unarmed (Mousse, 2011). Mr.. Vernon, who had a growth in his chest, two ruptured disks, and no Job said that he asked for only one dollar. He wanted to show that his motives were medical, and not about the money (Mousse, 2011). The charge he was booked on was Larceny and would not give him the prison stay he hoped to get in order to get the treatment he desperately wanted.In a country as wealthy as the United States, why should any citizen even be tempted to do such a thing? It is terrible that a person who was law-a biding beforehand would have to become a criminal in order to save his life. Should health care be something that should only be available to the highest bidder? In 2005 the per-capita health care spending reached $6797, this is 40% higher than any other nation with health care outcomes ranking 37th according to the World Health Organization (Beebe, 2009).Between 2003 and 2007, the combined profits of the largest insurance impasses rose by over 170%, which left their approval rating lower that tobacco companies. This was the resulted as worker's out-of-pocket spending for health care shot into the atmosphere 87% since 2000 (Beebe, 2009). It is estimated that 47 million Americans lived without insurance before our economy fell apart and unemployment's rise did nothing but add to those numbers (Beebe, 2009).It is estimated that half of all personal bankruptcies stem from drowning in the expenses of medical care, and in 76% of those cases, it was the main income that had insurance cove rage for the family (Beebe, 2009). Could there really be a better example that something needs to be done than what Mr.. Vernon did Just to get healthcare? Ethnologists of ethics don't look at the consequences of actions before coming up with an idea. One way they might see the healthcare debate could be that healthcare should be a personal responsibility. It could be argued that healthcare is something is a personal responsibility.It is up to the individual or family to make sure that they have the coverage that they need. A Ethnologist might say that by the government ensuring that there is healthcare available for people, it s government interference into people's affairs. If people want health insurance, than they can but it, or become employed at a Job that provides healthcare. However, when healthcare costs are so high that they are choking on the gases in Supplier's atmosphere, those who may wish to have a family doctor so they can get regular checkups yet cannot afford it.Lo oking at it from a utilitarian point of view, the majority of the public would benefit from healthcare being available for all. For example, a hospital in Costa Mesa, California, dumped Steven Davis in skid row at the New Image Shelter in 2008. The thirty-two year old man was diagnosed as schizophrenic and was considered to be dangerously delusional and paranoid (LA times, 2009). Not only did Mr.. Davis need care and medication, the hospital dumping him on the street could have turned out to be dangerous for someone else. Sadly, his is not the only case in which a hospital negligently dumped a patient for not having insurance.James Booking, a veteran of this country, was dumped in the parking lot of a shelter in California by the Department of Veteran Affairs medical center after his toe was removed due to a bone infection. He was wearing hospital pants, carrying urine bottle, and screaming for help from the wheelchair he was sitting in (Winston According to the 2006 Human Developme nt Report, the life & saves, 2011). Expectancy of someone living in the United Kingdom is 78. 5, France is 79. 5, Canadians can expect 80. 2, with the American expecting around 77. 5 (Watkins, 2006).The only major difference between these countries is that all but one ensures that their citizens have healthcare. The only one would be America that doesn't. Common sense should indicate that if we as Americans had access to preventative care, we might be able to save some change in our pockets by avoiding costly ERE In 2004, retiring representative Billy Taught of Louisiana stepped down visits. Early with the intention of taking a Job as the new president and CEO of the drug industry top lobbying group, Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (Welch, 2004).According to watchdog groups such as the Center fro Responsive Politics, prior to this event, Taught received $218,000 in campaign contributions from those in the pharmaceutical industry with contributions reaching $91 , 500 for 2002 which was the year he first became chairman of the committee with jurisdiction over the drug industry (Welch, 2004). There have been so many arguments over the separation of church and state, how about we start the argument over the separation of corporations and the state? In Cuba, 75% of the people are feeling positive regarding their education and healthcare systems (Worldpublicopinion. Rig, 2011). While many may not be so happy with their individual freedoms, they are happy with the fact that they can be seen by a doctor when they feel like it, considering their healthcare is universal. If a dictatorship which our government sees as an enemy will ensure that its citizens have healthcare, what goes that say about the government of a free country like ours? Should a woman be forced to choose between buying groceries and paying for her prescription medications in the United States? In a personal interview, Melissa Tearful shared her story about how she lost her health insurance, Just when she needed it the most.In 2006 she was diagnosed as having bipolar depression and post- traumatic stress syndrome. She started going to therapy once a week and got on medication which she said greatly improved her situation. â€Å"It was unbelievable, the difference I felt after I got on the right medications. It was like a weight had been lifted off of my shoulders. For the first time in years I was able to think clearly' (M. Tearful, personal interview September 21, 2011). She was on state health insurance and was kicked off of it because of a political decision by former Governor Blunt.Previously, single mothers were allowed to get state health insurance until their child became 18, but a recent bill passed saying that after the child turned one, the mother would lose the insurance. This meant more money for the state of Missouri, but it also meant that single mothers like Melissa were left without healthcare. She stated that she tried to apply for disabilit y insurance so that she could continue with her therapy and medications, but was rejected. Because she was able to maintain a Job, she was not considered eligible for any assistance. L felt like I was being punished for actually trying to better myself. You hear all the time how people with the same condition I have are not able to hold down a Job, or care for their kids, but because I am trying and making it, I cannot get any help. † (M. Tearful, personal interview, September 21 , 2011). Soon after losing her healthcare, she had to abandon both the medications and the therapy. Melissa stated that it was very difficult going off of the medications â€Å"cold turkey. † She shared that it was a very emotion-filled time for her.According to Melissa, her moods fluctuated frequently and she experienced many panic attacks in the first months afterwards. She said that as time went on, it became easier for her to cope, but that there are times when it is extremely difficult. Me lissa stated that she â€Å"can handle herself when she is manic by keeping herself busy, but when I am depressed, I can't think straight. Right and wrong sometimes go out the window when I get really into that state. It's like what ever feels good at the time seems so logical† (M. Tearful, personal interview, September 21, 2011).We tell our children that money is not everything, but yet when it comes down to the choice of more money or the well-being of a human, more often than not it is the money that wins out. Melissa Tearful went on to share with me the story of her coworker of seven years, Bruce Patterson. According to Ms. Tearful, Mr.. Patterson has been on high-blood pressure medicine for quite sometime, but when his hours got cut at work, he had to make some drastic changes n his lifestyle to be able to stay on his pills. Just to stay on the medicine that he very much needs, he stopped paying his electric bill for months in his trailer.Melissa said that it was during the winter of this year when he lost power for his home and would do things like stay at his Job at Burger King for many hours after his shift, sometimes even napping at the store in order to sleep some place warm (M. Tearful, personal interview, September 2, 2011). Via electronic communication Ms. Patti Hollies shared her sister's story of how she was left in pain because of lack of healthcare overage. According to Ms. Hollies, her sister had been experiencing pain in her leg and hip so she went to the ERE in Gerard, Ohio.The doctors did a CAT scan, which revealed nothing that would cause her to be in so much pain. They gave her a shot and sent her home. Over the next days she her condition did not improve, even after going to the ERE three more times. Because she had no insurance, the doctors refused to continue to seek out the cause of her condition. Her sister then brought her to SST. Elizabeth Free Medical Clinic in a wheelchair because, by this time, her sister was not blew to walk. Here X-rays were conducted, which also revealed nothing, so her sister was told that there was nothing more that they would do.She asked if maybe and MR. would help, but the nurse practitioner refused to order that test. Seeing her sister crying in pain, and knowing they were running out of options, she placed a phone call her own doctor (P. Hollies, electronic communication, September 26, 2011). This doctor recommended her sister be taken to the ERE in SST. Elizabethan Clinic by ambulance. She followed her doctor's advice, and her sister was admitted into the hospital. After getting an MR., her sister learned she had a herniated disc and had to have surgery. They also learned that she was diabetic.Once the surgery was performed, the pain went away and was doing very well. However, even after diagnosing her with having diabetes and prescribing her insulin, at no point was she taught how to take the medicine. A phone call was placed to the director of the hospital about the po or treatment her sister received at SST. Elizabethan and she was assured that her sister would be taken care of. It is the firm belief of Ms. Hollies that her sister's suffering was totally unnecessary. Had her sister had health insurance, she believes that the doctors would have been much more inclined to order tests.

Understanding Analogy in Literary Rhetoric