<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
<!-- generator="FeedCreator 1.7.2" -->
<rss version="2.0">
    <channel>
        <title>MedWorm Tags: direct to consumer</title>
        <description>MedWorm provides a medical RSS filtering service. Over 6000 RSS medical sources are combined and output via different filters. This feed contains the latest medical blog items that have been tagged with 'direct to consumer'.</description>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.medworm.com/rss/search.php?qu=%22direct+to+consumer%22&t=%22direct+to+consumer%22&r=Exact&o=d&f=tag]]></link>
        <lastBuildDate>Sat, 03 Sep 2011 02:10:51 +0100</lastBuildDate>
        <item>
            <title>Pfizer Hacking &amp; Pharma Ineptness: Meyer Explains</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5078037&amp;cid=t_128705_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2FzlP6m6NMZek%2F</link>
            <description>Last week, the Pfizer Facebook page was hacked by ScriptKiddies, setting off a flurry of chatter about not just hacking, but the extent to which this episode would affect the way drugmakers view the virtues of Facebook and, beyond that, social media (back story). This happened just as Facebook changes it rules so that drugmakers will no longer be allowed to disable comments, prompting some to consider walking away from Facebook (see this and this). We spoke with Rich Meyer, a former Eli Lilly marketer who worked on the Prozac and Cialis brand teams, and now runs Online Strategic Solutions and the World of DTC Marketing blog, for his thoughts on the implications&amp;#8230;
Pharmalot: How bad was the hacking incident?
Meyer: For consumers and patients, I don’t think it was that bad. They know ...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5078037</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 28 Jul 2011 13:23:23 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5078037</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Europe To Revise ‘Advertising In Disguise’ Proposal</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5069818&amp;cid=t_128705_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2FrIaNzGppPTA%2F</link>
            <description>Three years after making a proposal that would have allowed drugmakers to publish product information in consumer newspapers and magazines, the European Commission is going back to the proverbial drawing board and plans to issue a new proposal this fall, an EC spokesman writes us. The move comes after its initial effort was widely criticized and rejected by the European Parliament.
&amp;#8220;The European Commission will revise the proposals to clarify and harmonize the rules in what companies can and can’t say to patients,&amp;#8221; Peter Arlett, who heads pharmacovigilance and risk management at the European Medicines Agency, tells Bloomberg News. The EMA, he adds, recently received a letter from the EC about its intention to revise its proposal.
The original EC effort, which was unveiled in ...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5069818</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 27 Jul 2011 18:04:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5069818</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Pharmalot… Pharmalittle… Good Morning</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5069822&amp;cid=t_128705_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2F8WFD_ZbuCB4%2F</link>
            <description>Hello, everyone, and top of the morning to you. Another shiny day is unfolding on the Pharmalot corporate campus, where we have much to do. You know, the drill - reading documents, making phone calls, finding interesting tidbits. To prepare, yes, we are downing that mandatory cup of stimulation - our flavor today is Wild Mountain Blueberry. So please join us. Meanwhile, here are some items from around the world. Hope your day goes well and stay in touch&amp;#8230;
Pfizer&amp;#8217;s Zyvox and Antidepressants May Cause Fatal Reaction (Bloomberg News)
Valeant Approaches Swedish Drugmaker Mada About A Takeover (Bloomberg News)
Abortion Pill Given Via Telemedicine Is Safe And Effective (Reuters)
Vertex Says Hepatitis C Drug Combo Works (Reuters)
Naeja Pharmaceutical R&amp;#038;D Facility Catches Fire (Cal...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5069822</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 27 Jul 2011 11:41:22 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5069822</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>DTC Advertising And Diminishing Returns?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4893921&amp;cid=t_128705_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2FREZzViN0L2Q%2F</link>
            <description>The other day, the US Congressional Budget Office issued a brief that spelled out the upside and downside of a moratorium on direct-to-consumer advertising (see here). That bottom line message suggested that DTC does offer a public health benefit and that drugmakers would likely shift much of their promotional efforts to doctors. 
But a new survey suggests that DTC may have reached the proverbial point of diminishing returns, according to Cutting Edge Information, which queried 19 drugmakers and found that many, if given the opportunity, would spend additional promotional dollars in other ways.
Drugmakers surveyed say they make 14 percent more money by using DTC than if the advertising was discontinued and spending remained static for other promotional efforts. But the return on DTC is als...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4893921</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 02 Jun 2011 13:26:28 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4893921</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Upside &amp; Downside Of A DTC Moratorium</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4883906&amp;cid=t_128705_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2F0AeYJTTYrjk%2F</link>
            <description>Over the past several years, Congress has regularly considered legislation to restrict direct-to-consumer advertising of prescription drugs, perhaps for the first couple of years after a med has been approved by the FDA. The rationale has been that DTC ads encourage unnecessary use of some meds and lead to usage before risks are fully known. Nothing has passed yet, but the idea lives on.
And so the US Congressional Budget Office has issued a brief and found drugmakers would probably expand marketing to docs in order to substitute for any banned ads; the number of prescriptions filled for some drugs would probably decline, but for others, scrips may not change, since there would be other forms of promotion, and any change in prices would depend on changes in demand.
Moreover, a moratorium c...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4883906</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 31 May 2011 13:57:51 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4883906</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The FDA Will Study DTC On Branded Web Sites</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4759038&amp;cid=t_128705_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2FuO-4Fn87I3M%2F</link>
            <description>File this under &amp;#8216;better late than never&amp;#8230;sort of.&amp;#8217; Several years after the Internet took off and branded product web sites began appearing, the FDA is now getting ready to study the extent to which risk and benefit information is presented and digested. The details are expected to appear tomorrow in the Federal Register.
&amp;#8220;This research is relevant to current policy questions and debate and will complement qualitative research we plan to conduct on issues surrounding social media. The original regulations that presently determine FDA’s position on DTC promotion were written at a time when the available media for DTC promotion were print and broadcast, and the primary audience was health care professionals. This dynamic is shifting, and evidence is needed to support ...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4759038</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 27 Apr 2011 16:34:57 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4759038</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>How Your Medication List Makes You The Perfect Pharma Target</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4592398&amp;cid=t_128705_87_f&amp;fid=39187&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fgetbetterhealth.com%2Fhow-your-medication-list-makes-you-the-perfect-pharma-target%2F2011.03.14</link>
            <description>Give me your medication list and I&amp;#8217;ll tell you your health problems. It happens every day in emergency rooms across the country as confused elderly patients present for an acute problem unable to describe their past medical history, but equipped with a list of medications in their wallet:
Metformin = Type-2 diabetes
Synthroid = Hypothyroidism
Lipitor + Altace + Lasix + Slo-K = Ischemic cardiomyopathy
Lexapro = A little anxious or depressed
Viagra = Well, you know&amp;#8230;
I bet I&amp;#8217;d be right better than 90 percent of the time. Now, imagine you&amp;#8217;re a pharmaceutical company wanting to target people with those chronic diseases. Where might you find them?
No problem. Just pay the insurers to provide you patients&amp;#8217; drug lists. No names need be exchanged in keeping with HIPA...</description>
            <author>Better Health</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4592398</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 14 Mar 2011 19:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4592398</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Those Non-Branded DTC Ads Seem To Be Working</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4560593&amp;cid=t_128705_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2Fa3XeUYxmKn0%2F</link>
            <description>More than a decade has past since direct-to-consumer advertising of prescription drugs has become a fixture of American culture. More recently, though, the so-called unbranded ad - which discusses diseases instead of specific meds - has become equally ubiquitous. But how do these resonate with consumers? 
A new study finds that non-branded ads compared favorably with conventional ads for specific branded meds. A total of 437 people were divided into two groups and then four subgroups, who were shown branded or non-branded ads for either allergy meds or oral contraceptives (drug and company names were fictitious in order to reduce bias). They were asked 16 questions to measure involvement and attitude toward the ads, the companies and the pharmaceutical industry.
The upshot? Not surprisingl...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4560593</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 08 Mar 2011 15:54:11 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4560593</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Bills Would End DTC Tax Break &amp; Allow Importation</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4507582&amp;cid=t_128705_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2Fjhk8uLvM9QY%2F</link>
            <description>Call it congressional deja vu. Last week, a pair of bills that previously went nowhere were again introduced and both take aim at brand-name drugmakers. The first, called the Say No to Drug Ads Act, would eliminate tax breaks for direct-to-consumer advertising and was introduced by Jerry Nadler, a Democratic Congressman from New York who failed to enlist any co-sponsors.
The rationale for his repeat effort is that DTC ads allow drugmakers to &amp;#8220;keep prices artificially high, steering consumers – and physicians – away from generics&amp;#8230;It’s bad enough that TV drug ads mislead consumers and tout benefits of high-priced drugs without properly conveying the risks, but the drug companies don’t need extra subsidies to do so,&amp;#8221; he says in a statement. (You can read the bill her...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4507582</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 22 Feb 2011 13:27:06 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4507582</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Should Congress Change The Rules On DTC Ads?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4460181&amp;cid=t_128705_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2FwKUwtDU-Yns%2F</link>
            <description>The floodgates opened in 1997. That was when the FDA decided to allow direct-to-consumer advertising on television, initiating a great debate about the virtues of such DTC ads for prescription drugs between drugmakers, doctors and patients that, eventually, embroiled legislators, ad agencies and First Amendment lawyers.
Why? Doctors have been angry that patients were incorrectly pressuring them for prescriptions. Other critic complained that ads minimized risks, steered patients toward expensive meds and promoted unnecessary usage. Pharma, meanwhile, has pointed out that ads successfully enlighten consumers and drive them to learn more about their health, sometimes having meaningful discussions with docs.
Now, though, TV ads may have reached a watermark. Why? Writing in The New York Times,...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4460181</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 10 Feb 2011 19:26:07 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4460181</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>“Clinically Proven?” There’s No Such Thing</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4455265&amp;cid=t_128705_87_f&amp;fid=39187&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fgetbetterhealth.com%2Fclinically-proven-theres-no-such-thing%2F2011.02.09</link>
            <description>I heard yet another commercial on the radio this morning for some menopausal cure-all that was “clinically proven” to reduce hot flashes, improve sleep, increase energy, help you lose weight, and probably cure bad breath to boot. Anyone who calls in the next ten minutes gets a month’s supply for free. &amp;#8220;Hurry.&amp;#8221; Don’t.
At least they finally stopped running the one for the colon cleansing product that helped remove the “five to ten pounds of waste some experts* believe are spackled along the inside of the large intestine.” (*Emphasis mine. “Some experts” also believe the moon landing was a hoax, the Holocaust never happened, and homeopathy is effective medicine.) Somehow this colon cleansing stuff helps you preferentially lose belly fat. Not really sure what belly ...</description>
            <author>Better Health</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4455265</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 09 Feb 2011 16:00:02 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4455265</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Peddling Of Genetic Tests</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4386271&amp;cid=t_128705_87_f&amp;fid=39187&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fgetbetterhealth.com%2Fthe-peddling-of-genetic-tests%2F2011.01.22</link>
            <description>In a recent issue of the British Medical Journal (BMJ), journalist Ray Moynihan wrote: &amp;#8220;Beware the fortune tellers peddling genetic tests.&amp;#8221; (Subscription required for full access.) Excerpts:
&amp;#8220;For anyone concerned about the creeping medicalisation of life, the marketplace for genetic testing is surely one of the latest frontiers, where apparently harmless technology can help mutate healthy people into fearful patients, their personhood redefined by multiple genetic predispositions for disease and early death.
&amp;#8230;
Again a tool that&amp;#8217;s proved useful in the laboratory has escaped like a virus into the marketplace, incubated by entrepreneurs, lazy reporters, and the power of our collective dreams of technological salvation, this time in the form of personalised medici...</description>
            <author>Better Health</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4386271</comments>
            <pubDate>Sat, 22 Jan 2011 23:00:22 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4386271</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Personal Genetic Testing: Psychological And Behavioral Effects</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4377571&amp;cid=t_128705_87_f&amp;fid=39187&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fgetbetterhealth.com%2Fpersonal-genetic-testing-psychological-and-behavioral-effects%2F2011.01.20</link>
            <description>In conclusion, personal genetic testing does not seem to generate a lot of distress, although the study was clearly limited by a high dropout percentage of 44 percent and the self-selection of participants who opted to do the test.
Article in New England Journal of Medicine: Effect of Direct-to-Consumer Genomewide Profiling to Assess Disease Risk
Flashback: An Interview with Navigenics&amp;#8230;


			
			*This blog post was originally published at Medgadget* (Source: Better Health)</description>
            <author>Better Health</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4377571</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 20 Jan 2011 16:00:21 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4377571</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Who Said DTC Advertising Had To Be Tasteful?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4305102&amp;cid=t_128705_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2FCxc41W3S1Z8%2F</link>
            <description>And so it has come to this: a direct-to-consumer ad for Rapaflo, which is used to treat symptoms of an enlarged prostate, including urinary frequency and urgency, is being promoted in a magazine ad that shows a man peeing by the side of the road. 
Certainly, the sudden need to pee is a universal phenomenon and relieving oneself in unusual venues is hardly unique (although there can be consequences: three of The Rolling Stones were arrested for doing so on the wall of a London gas station in 1965). And given that the photo suggests there is no bathroom in the desert, the poor fellow can hardly be blamed for splashing the dusty roadside (perhaps he forgot to bring a handy-dandy bottle for such occasions?)
In running the ad, Watson Pharmaceuticals, which markets Rapaflo, and its ad agency, mo...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4305102</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 03 Jan 2011 13:57:40 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4305102</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Medical Marketing: More Money Wasted</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4258870&amp;cid=t_128705_87_f&amp;fid=39187&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fgetbetterhealth.com%2Fmedical-marketing-more-money-wasted%2F2010.12.13</link>
            <description>There was a series of ads on the radio awhile back that went something like this:
When Mrs. Willis had a stroke, her husband never slept alone. Her daughter never had to go dress shopping for the prom by herself. And her son didn’t have to sit out the Mother-Son dance at his wedding. Why? Because she came to Hospital A…and she didn’t die!
There’s another ad for one of the big downtown hospital’s cancer center (sorry, “advanced cancer center”):
Every cancer, every stage. Your life depends on it!
Let’s see: No one ever dies at Hospital A. And the big downtown cancer center can cure any cancer. That’s certainly what those ads would have you believe. Even the little local suburban hospitals have taken to advertising: Billboards around the neighborhoods, kiosks at the outlet m...</description>
            <author>Better Health</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4258870</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 13 Dec 2010 19:00:15 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4258870</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>A Secret “Sign Of Aging”: International Disease Mongering</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4105667&amp;cid=t_128705_87_f&amp;fid=39187&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fgetbetterhealth.com%2Fa-secret-sign-of-aging-international-disease-mongering%2F2010.10.25</link>
            <description>Just five days ago we wrote about an American journalist&amp;#8217;s observations of medicalization of one problem sometimes observed after menopause: Vaginal atrophy.
Today we see that this disease-mongering trend has popped up in Australia as well. This should be no surprise. Such campaigns are usually led by multinational pharmaceutical companies and their advertising and public relations agencies.
What caught our eye was an article on a women&amp;#8217;s health foundation website &amp;#8212; a foundation that posts a pretty thin excuse for why it won&amp;#8217;t tell you its source of funding. Its article on vaginal atrophy uses classic disease-mongering language:
&amp;#8220;Ask a woman over the age of 50 about the &amp;#8216;signs of ag[e]ing&amp;#8217; and she&amp;#8217;ll most likely lament about grey hairs, wrin...</description>
            <author>Better Health</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4105667</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 25 Oct 2010 18:00:43 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4105667</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Do You Have “Low T?”</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4077246&amp;cid=t_128705_87_f&amp;fid=39187&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fgetbetterhealth.com%2Fdo-you-have-low-t%2F2010.10.17</link>
            <description>If you google “low testosterone” you’ll see lots of ads for testosterone replacement. Some are from pharmaceutical companies that sell testosterone, others from obvious snake-oil salesmen.
Both types of ads list vague sets of symptoms, encourage you to believe that they are pathologic, and want to sell you something to make you better. For example, the pharmaceutical company Solvay gives you a handy guide for speaking to your doctor, and a quiz to see if you have “low T.” The quiz asks some questions that may be useful, but also asks very general questions about your sense of well being. (more&amp;#8230;)

			
			*This blog post was originally published at Science-Based Medicine* (Source: Better Health)</description>
            <author>Better Health</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4077246</comments>
            <pubDate>Sun, 17 Oct 2010 21:00:01 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4077246</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Europe Scraps ‘Advertising In Disguise’ Proposal</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4023134&amp;cid=t_128705_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2FkGRuStkhCj0%2F</link>
            <description>The European Parliament has rejected a controversial proposal by the European Commission that would have allowed drugmakers to publish product info in consumer newspapers and magazines. The effort was designed to provide more reliable medical advice at a time when the Internet allows widespread dissemination of questionable info, since drugmakers are prevented from circulating data.
However, the proposal, which was first introduced nearly two years ago, was criticized for weakening existing EU restrictions on contacts between drugmakers and patients, including a strict ban on US-style direct-to-consumer advertising. Some critics argued the proposal, which was branded &amp;#8216;advertising in disguise,&amp;#8217; would encourage the inappropriate use of medicines. A ban on DTC advertising on broad...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4023134</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 01 Oct 2010 13:12:03 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4023134</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Online Spending Is Growing Very Slowly</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3911866&amp;cid=t_128705_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2FhVsGkz31etk%2F</link>
            <description>For all the talk about embracing the Internet and social media, the amount of healthcare and pharma ad spending online will remain steady at about 4 percent of the total in 2014, even as the annual projected increases in such spending climb significantly. This year, for instance, online ad spending is expected to rise 10.6 percent, to $1 billion, and grow by 9.3 percent in 2014 to $1.52 billion.
Why is the total online pharma and healthcare spending - which includes both direct-to-consumer ads for prescription meds and over-the-counter salves - not going to account for very much? There are several reasons, according to eMarketer, which issued the report. For one thing, the FDA has not yet issued clear guidelines for search and social media, although these may be released later this year.
F...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3911866</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 27 Aug 2010 14:16:25 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3911866</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The “DNA Dilemma”</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3885345&amp;cid=t_128705_87_f&amp;fid=39187&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fgetbetterhealth.com%2Fthe-dna-dilemma%2F2010.08.19</link>
            <description>Mary Carmichael of Newsweek had a great series of articles focusing on direct-to-consumer genetic testing. An excerpt:
I’ve been following DTC genetics since 2007, when wide scanning first became available to the public. Since then, a number of writers have gotten wide-scale genetic tests and expounded on the results. Indeed, I sometimes wonder if I’m the last science reporter on earth with virgin genes. (Technical virgin: My doctor gave me a cystic fibrosis carrier test when I was pregnant.) Initially, I put off getting a full-genome scan because I wasn’t sure how useful such a test would be. I had no particular reason to take one, save curiosity. I wouldn’t expect to find anything serious and potentially life-altering like the Huntington’s disease gene in my results, because ...</description>
            <author>Better Health</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3885345</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 19 Aug 2010 16:00:08 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3885345</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Drug Ads: Consumers And Doctors Are Tuning Them Out</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3746741&amp;cid=t_128705_87_f&amp;fid=39187&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fgetbetterhealth.com%2Fdrug-ads-consumers-and-doctors-are-tuning-them-out%2F2010.07.12</link>
            <description>How effective is direct-to-consumer drug advertising? Some think that drug ads should be banned altogether, saying that it encourages patients to ask their doctors for expensive, brand name prescription drugs. It turns out their fears may be overblown.
NPR’s Shots blogs about a recent study looking at the effectiveness of these ads. The numbers, for the pharmaceutical companies anyways, are not encouraging. (more&amp;#8230;)

			
			*This blog post was originally published at KevinMD.com* (Source: Better Health)</description>
            <author>Better Health</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3746741</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 12 Jul 2010 12:00:19 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3746741</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The FDA Could Receive How Much Federal Funding?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3718696&amp;cid=t_128705_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2FoOozbSbd4XU%2F</link>
            <description>The FDA is always under the gun, and both critics and supporters often point to a lack of funding. So how much money might be headed its way in fiscal 2011? Yesterday, the House Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration and Related Agencies Appropriations Subcommittee did a mark up and suggested $2.57 billion in funding – $55 million above the budget request. This is discretionary spending.
Overall, the agency would have $3.8 billion for oversight - roughly $214 million above last year&amp;#8217;s bill - when including $1.2 billion in user fees, notes Rosa DeLauro, the Connecticut Democrat who chairs the subcommittee, who has been harping on drug safety lately. [EDITORS' NOTE: Yes, there was a math problem earlier and we have clarified the numbers]. So the proposal include...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3718696</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 01 Jul 2010 13:49:21 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3718696</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>DTC Spending Will Grow In 2010: Survey</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3714443&amp;cid=t_128705_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2FmA4PGY91Dv4%2F</link>
            <description>Where is direct-to-consumer advertising headed this year? Which activities will garner a bigger share of the budget than others? Celebrity endorsements? Product placements? Patient education? To get a grip, Cegedim Dendrite surveyed 199 folks from drugmakers, ad agencies and consultants, and learned that 51 percent say DTC will be more effective this year, while 45 percent say it will be less effective. They also learned that&amp;#8230;
Overall, the DTC spending outlook is brighter - 41 percent believe spending will increase this year, which is up from 20 percent last year. However, 31 percent expect DTC spending will stay the same, while 54 percent of those who foresee lower spending say funds will be shifted to different programs. Such as? 19 percent say a shift to targeted direct-to-patient...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3714443</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 30 Jun 2010 16:52:11 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3714443</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Curious About Your DNA? Just Stop By Walgreens</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3585611&amp;cid=t_128705_87_f&amp;fid=39187&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fgetbetterhealth.com%2Fcurious-about-your-dna-just-stop-by-walgreens%2F2010.05.20</link>
            <description>I’ve been writing about personal genomics for years. The standard concept of it is that you can order such genetic tests online, send your saliva or buccal swab to the lab where they analyze your DNA, then you can check online what kind of diseases you have elevated or lowered risk for. That’s how Navigenics, 23andMe or Pathway Genomics works. Now Pathway had a major announcement:
San Diego based startup Pathway Genomics announced [May 18th] that it will begin selling its DNA collection kits at Walgreens drugstores beginning in mid-May, for about $20 to $30. Unlike a pregnancy test, users won’t be able to get results immediately. They will have to send in their saliva sample and then go to Pathway’s website to select the particular test they want. Users choose from drug response ...</description>
            <author>Better Health</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3585611</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 20 May 2010 16:00:07 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3585611</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>DTC Ads Not Biggest Driver Of Drug Spending: Study</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3570062&amp;cid=t_128705_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2FLSXLDw7UnbA%2F</link>
            <description>If you enjoy discussions of price elasticity, do we have a paper for you. Economic simulations suggest that the expansion in broadcast DTC ads may have been responsible for 19 percent of the overall growth in prescription drug spending from 1994 to 2005, with over two-thirds driven by increased demand due to expanded advertising and the remainder due to higher prices. All this is according to a new paper published by the National Bureau of Economic Research (purchase required).
But while DTC advertising was deemed significant, the authors conclude &amp;#8220;it has not been the primary force driving the growth in overall prescription drug expenditures.&amp;#8221; [UPDATE: Curiously, the conclusion seems to contradict the bottom-line findings.] The study examined the separate effects of broadcast a...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3570062</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 17 May 2010 12:53:54 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3570062</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>FDA To Docs: Tell Us About ‘Bad Drug Ads’</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3556378&amp;cid=t_128705_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2FfAGgDJ3OVfM%2F</link>
            <description>If you&amp;#8217;re a doctor, the FDA wants your help in identifying &amp;#8216;bad&amp;#8217; advertisements for prescription drugs. Seriously. The agency is calling it&amp;#8217;s new &amp;#8216;Bad Ad&amp;#8217; program an educational outreach effort and, not surprisingly, it&amp;#8217;s being run by DDMAC, the agency’s Division of Drug Marketing, Advertising, and Communications, which issues all those warning letters and violations.
The goal of the program is to &amp;#8220;help health care providers recognize misleading prescription drug promotion and provide them with an easy way to report this activity to the agency,” DDMAC director Tom Abrams says in a statement. Usually, the FDA finds &amp;#8216;bad ads&amp;#8217; by reviewing promotional materials submitted for agency review, fielding complaints (often one company s...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3556378</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 11 May 2010 17:26:52 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3556378</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Is The FDA Proposal For DTC Ads Too Vague?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3433163&amp;cid=t_128705_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2FUA22jhwEpZQ%2F</link>
            <description>The FDA has proposed a new rule to amend its direct-to-consumer regulations covering broadcast ads and would require info about side effects and contraindications to be presented in a &amp;#8220;clear, conspicuous and neutral manner.&amp;#8221; The requirements are:
The DTC ad must have &amp;#8220;language that is readily understandable by consumers;&amp;#8221; audio info must be understandable, referring to volume, articulation and pacing; text info must be placed appropriately and on a contrasting background long enough and in lettering that is easily read; and the ad shouldn&amp;#8217;t include &amp;#8220;distracting representations,&amp;#8221; such as statements, text, images, sound or a combination that would detract from communicating the &amp;#8220;major statement.&amp;#8221;
What, exactly, is language that is readily...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3433163</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 02 Apr 2010 14:28:04 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3433163</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Pharmalot… Pharmalittle… The Weekend Nears</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3383084&amp;cid=t_128705_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2FbE0Kh-Z1OvI%2F</link>
            <description>And so another working week will soon draw to a close. Although several more hours of deadlines and meetings may lie ahead, the time has come to think dreamy thoughts about what you will do this weekend. We, for instance, will tidy up the Pharmalot corporate campus, take a long walk and happily watch one of our short people in a school performance. While you ponder your own possibilities, here are a few items to help speed things along. Whatever you do, have a great time&amp;#8230;
Pfizer CEO Kindler Named PhRMA Chairman (press release)
Somaxon Wins FDA Approval For Insomnia Drug (Associated Press)
Florida Limits Foster Care Reliance On Psychotropics (Tampa Bay Tribune)
New Attack On EU Plan For Patient Drug Info (PharmaTimes)
photo thx to tipiro on Flickr creative commons (Source: Pharmalot)</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3383084</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2010 11:58:21 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3383084</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>DTC Ads Drove Website Traffic To These Brands…</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3197885&amp;cid=t_128705_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2F_5l-Xitz6Rs%2F</link>
            <description>For those wondering about the reactions that some consumers have to DTC television ads, some decide to search for more info online. So which ads are prompting the most activity and which product sites are visited? NuvaRing and Latisse had the highest percentage of overall product website traffic driven by their DTC TV ads, according to Manhattan Research.
NuvaRing, which is a contraceptive made by Merck, jumped five spots from last year to take the top ranking. And as you can see, Allergan&amp;#8217;s new eyelash enhancement treatment, Latisse, grabbed the No. 2 spot. Unfortunately, there was no corresponding info to contrast the amount of ad spending with web traffic. In any event, here is the list of the ten brands for which DTC ads drove the most web traffic&amp;#8230;
1.  NuvaRing
2.  Latisse
...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3197885</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 22 Jan 2010 13:19:09 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3197885</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>DTC Ad Spending Is On The Rise Again</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3067310&amp;cid=t_128705_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2F-x7gV8k38Yw%2F</link>
            <description>Direct-to-consumer spending was declining for the last few quarters, but came bounding back in the recently ended third quarter - rising 15 percent to $1.16 billion, according to DTC Perspectives, a consulting firm, which cited data from TNS Media Intelligence. 
The increase apparently marks the first quarterly gain in DTC spending in nearly two years and, interestingly, contrasts significantly with the spending trend earlier this year, when DTC advertising slumped 6.4 percent between January and June, compared with the same period a year ago. 
Not surprisingly, spending on the Internet rose the most, the firm reports, more than tripling between January and September to $221 million (display ads only). And more ads were placed in newspapers, which showed a 25 percent gain to $104 million d...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3067310</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 08 Dec 2009 13:09:09 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3067310</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Pharma Spending On Detailing Is Up: CBO</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3056885&amp;cid=t_128705_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2FLdYhC8jK_Cg%2F</link>
            <description>A new report from the Congressional Budget Office examines promotional spending by drugmakers, including an analysis of direct-to-consumer advertising in recent years. For those in the know, there are probably few surprises. Nonetheless, the summary is interesting and worth noting. Here are some highlights&amp;#8230;
- In 2008, spending on DTC ads totaled $4.7 billion, nearly one-fourth of industry spending for all promotional activities. Promotional spending, which includes detailing, ad journals, meetings and DTC ads, was $20.5 billion last year, or 10.8 percent of US sales last year. The CBO, which says spending was typically between 10 percent and 12 percent since the early 1990&amp;#8217;s, cited sales data reported by PhRMA, which presumably relies on annual reports. DTC advertising has decl...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3056885</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 03 Dec 2009 18:57:10 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3056885</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Ineffective Plavix Ads Cost US Taxpayers A Bundle</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3023411&amp;cid=t_128705_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2Fx7OkCwU8iGw%2F</link>
            <description>The price Medicaid paid for the bloodthinner rose 12 percent “immediately” after direct-to-consumer ads began in 2001, and those higher costs added $207 million to Medicaid spending in 27 states during the next four years, even as prescriptions rose at a constant rate, according to a study in the Archives of Internal Medicine. 
Pharmacy data from Medicaid programs in 27 states revealed that Plavix sales rose steadily since it was launched and the trend remained constant between 1999 and 2005. But the cost to Medicaid rose by $207 million after ads started running in 2002. And guess what? The price of Plavix was hiked price 12 percent, or 40 cents a pill, when a $350 million ad campaign began.
“Payers and policy makers should be very concerned about the potential for drug advertising ...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3023411</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 24 Nov 2009 13:25:01 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3023411</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>So Maybe DTC Ads Aren’t Worth It, After All</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2977569&amp;cid=t_128705_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2FAJal4KDWV30%2F</link>
            <description>Judging by a recent survey, that may seem to be the case. Direct-to-consumer ads are mentioned mostly by docs to increase patient acceptance for a medicine that&amp;#8217;s already been chosen. But unaided - or spontaneous - mention by patients or actual patient requests for a specific med is a rare phenomenon, according to the survey by Verilogue. 
The firm tracked brand requests coupled with a reference to specific ad campaigns across 12,500 doctor-patient conversations from 2008 and covered 20 disease states and 46 different branded prescription drugs. Overall, DTC &amp;#8216;pull-through&amp;#8217; in conversations in a doc&amp;#8217;s office is low - just 3 percent - and specific patient requests for advertised med are even lower - .002 percent.
Significantly, the most frequently pulled-through brand...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2977569</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 10 Nov 2009 13:20:15 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2977569</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Seven Reasons Why Home DNA Tests Are Hype</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2752087&amp;cid=t_128705_131_f&amp;fid=34989&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.b5media.com%2F%7Er%2Fb5media%2FGeneticsHealth%2F%7E3%2FkDNsa2XdrJs%2F</link>
            <description>Testing for one’s genetic risk has become increasingly popular in recent years with the mapping of the human genome. Now, you have the opportunity to know if you carry the BRCA genes, or know your risk for Alzheimer&amp;#8217;s, other cancers, heart diseases and other diseases and traits, and even one’s genetic ancestry, based on the presence of certain DNA segments in your genome.
Direct-to-Consumer (DTC) DNA testing, also known as personal genome services, allows a person to get his genetic profile just simply by swabbing one’s cheeks or spitting into a test tube and sending the sample back to the genetic testing company. In a few weeks you have your results back in print and at a password-controlled website. Pretty nifty, right?
Actor Ernie Hudson swabs cheek for African Ancestry DNA ...</description>
            <author>Genetics and Health</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2752087</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 01 Sep 2009 03:59:12 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2752087</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Have You Seen the New Yaz Commercials?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2150715&amp;cid=t_128705_86_f&amp;fid=34445&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwomenshealthnews.wordpress.com%2F2009%2F02%2F01%2Fhave-you-seen-the-new-yaz-commercials%2F</link>
            <description>This weekend, I saw a new commercial for Yaz birth control, which features a female spokesperson and started with a statement along the lines that the FDA thought the previous ads were inadequate and asked that they clear up a few things.
I&amp;#8217;m pretty sure that&amp;#8217;s the first time I&amp;#8217;ve noticed an explicit &amp;#8220;the FDA made us do this&amp;#8221; message in a drug ad.
The FDA really did make them do it, though, issuing a warning letter [PDF] last October stating that &amp;#8220;The TV Ads are misleading because they broaden the drug&amp;#8217;s indication, overstate the efficacy of YAZ, and minimize serious risks associated with the use of the drug.&amp;#8221;
Don&amp;#8217;t remember the ads in question? What if I sing &amp;#8220;we&amp;#8217;re not gonna take it&amp;#8221; or &amp;#8220;goodbye to you&amp;#8221; f...</description>
            <author>Women's Health News</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2150715</comments>
            <pubDate>Sun, 01 Feb 2009 22:04:04 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2150715</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>What Personalized Medicine really needs – Francis Collins</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2150842&amp;cid=t_128705_131_f&amp;fid=34989&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.b5media.com%2F%7Er%2Fb5media%2FGeneticsHealth%2F%7E3%2FniC0Uc_RKKA%2F</link>
            <description>&amp;#160; After describing himself as an “unemployed geneticist”, Francis Collins now reveals that he has been “working night and day” with the White House transition for health and human services with Tom Daschle.&amp;#160; Now that that’s over, he is ready to discuss the progress that personalized medicine needs for it to move forward in a responsible way. 
Francis Collins, the public face of the human genome research and former director of the National Human Genome Research Institute, spoke to biomedical researchers, biotech execs and policy people at a meeting in Washington DC organized by the Personalized Medicine Coalition. 
&amp;quot;If we&amp;#8217;re serious about preventive medicine, and using personalized genomics to inform that, we&amp;#8217;re not going to change the genome,&amp;quot; he s...</description>
            <author>Genetics and Health</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2150842</comments>
            <pubDate>Sun, 01 Feb 2009 14:54:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2150842</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Had genetic test, will interview</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2149663&amp;cid=t_128705_131_f&amp;fid=34989&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.b5media.com%2F%7Er%2Fb5media%2FGeneticsHealth%2F%7E3%2FOYsK0PypSK4%2F</link>
            <description>I hear so much about genetic testing these days that I’ve always wanted to find out what that experience is like for people who had the test done. Sure, it’s painless (just a saliva or cheek scrape will do). But more than the test itself, I want to know what your life is like these days. 
What was it like to know you are at risk for this X disease? What did you do with your results? Are you now eating, living better? Do you feel trapped, empowered, confused? 
I do want to know. Maybe I’m the coward who can’t face the mortality of my future. I don’t know that if I knew, I would do something about it, or I would be scared stiff to change. (What’s the point, right?) So hearing from other people who are more adventurous than me would probably help. 
It turns out, I’m not the only...</description>
            <author>Genetics and Health</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2149663</comments>
            <pubDate>Sat, 31 Jan 2009 15:02:12 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2149663</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>More patients are confused about genetic tests, says advocacy group</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2104562&amp;cid=t_128705_131_f&amp;fid=34989&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.b5media.com%2F%7Er%2Fb5media%2FGeneticsHealth%2F%7E3%2FrWjz8N5fr_g%2F</link>
            <description>&amp;nbsp; Genetic tests for common medical conditions and disorders have become more in demand in the past years. The popularity increased even more when celebrities and universities began publishing their genetic information online, and direct-to-consumer genetic companies sprouted like mushrooms. Soon, genetic tests could become a common diagnostic tool at the doctor&amp;#8217;s office. 
Getting access to our risk information is relevant to making informed decisions about our lifestyle. The hope is that if a person will understand his risk, say, for certain cardiovascular diseases, then he will take better care of himself to avoid getting the disease. 
And that&amp;#8217;s where the shortcomings lie. Sue Friedman, executive director of the patient advocacy group Facing Our Risk of Cancer Empowered ...</description>
            <author>Genetics and Health</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2104562</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 14 Jan 2009 19:01:03 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2104562</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Where, Oh Where, Have All Those Ads Gone?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2027778&amp;cid=t_128705_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2F479674552%2F</link>
            <description>Let&amp;#8217;s not overstate the case - advertising on pharmaceuticals has not disappeared. But there do appear to be fewer ads. Spending fell 6 percent in the first eight months of the year, to $3.2 billion, according to TNS Media Intelligence, and that followed a decline of 3 percent for all of last year to $5.3 billion, Dow Jones reports.
Why? Much of the decline came from a downturn in so-called non-branded advertising, including corporate promotion messages and disease-awareness spots, TNS tells the news service. Another factor appears to be the drop in FDA approvals of new drugs is another factor, since spending on new brands fell 7 percent last year while spending on established brands rose 5 percent.
Before last year, direct-to-consumer advertising was generally increasing and peaked ...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2027778</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 09 Dec 2008 16:34:16 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2027778</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Waxman Renews Call To Ban Ads For New Drugs</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2027783&amp;cid=t_128705_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2F479449838%2F</link>
            <description>Henry Waxman, the California Democrat who will soon head the House Energy &amp;#038; Commerce Commitee, wants to give the FDA the power to ban direct-to-consumer ads when a new medicine first reaches the market and risks are not fully known, Reuters writes. The idea is one of several he hopes to pursue come January after a new Congress convenes, he told an industry conference yesterday.
&amp;#8220;It is in these first few years of a drug&amp;#8217;s life that drug companies often aggressively market their products and engage in direct-to-consumer advertising. This increases the number of consumers exposed to safety risks of new products long before those risks are truly understood,&amp;#8221; Waxman said at a conference sponsored by The Prescription Project, a group critical of industry marketing.
He supp...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2027783</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 09 Dec 2008 11:34:33 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2027783</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Europe Drops Plan To Ban Parallel Trade</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2021731&amp;cid=t_128705_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2F478395552%2F</link>
            <description>A planned reform of the European Union&amp;#8217;s pharmaceutical industry no longer contains a ban on the repackaging of prescription drugs for resale, according to a draft document obtained by Reuters. Parallel traders, who buy and resell prescription drugs to exploit price differences among EU states, had faced a repackaging ban in an earlier version of the reform due for formal adoption this week. 
EU Industry Commissioner Guenter Verheugen faced pressure from parallel traders who argued a ban would have wiped them out, because they would have to repackage drugs so that explanatory leaflets to patients are in the right language. &amp;#8220;Instead, a new article&amp;#8230;has been added to allow manufacturing authorization holders such as parallel traders to replace safety features under strict co...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2021731</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 08 Dec 2008 12:09:29 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2021731</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>BLOGSCAN - Direct-to-Consumer Device Advertising on YouTube Sans Adverse Effects Information</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2017516&amp;cid=t_128705_87_f&amp;fid=34765&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhcrenewal.blogspot.com%2F2008%2F12%2Fblogscan-direct-to-consumer-device.html</link>
            <description>On the PostScript blog, the Prescription Project announced the discovery of direct-to-consumer marketing videos released on YouTube by three device companies. The video from Abbott advertised the XIENCE-V drug eluting stent. That from Medtronic advertised the Prestige cervical disc. That from Stryker advertised its Cormet hip resurfacing technology. Apparently none of these brave new advertisements bothered to put in the discussion about adverse effects mandated by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The new media obviously presents new opportunities for marketing, including marketing that gets around rules usually applied in other media. Kudos to the Prescription Project for blowing the whistle on this one.According to this post, soon after the three companies pulled these ads. The...</description>
            <author>Health Care Renewal</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2017516</comments>
            <pubDate>Sat, 06 Dec 2008 21:15:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2017516</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Should TV Ads Carry Toll-Free Numbers?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1991562&amp;cid=t_128705_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2F465356000%2F</link>
            <description>The FDA plans to interview more than 1,500 consumers to decide whether DTC TV ads should urge patients to report side effects, the Associated Press writes. However, some critics argue the toll-free number could distract viewers from other important safety info about prescription drugs.
Print ads already include contact info for the FDA, as required by a law passed last September. The legislation ordered the FDA to report to Congress by late March whether that info should also be mandatory for TV ads. But the agency requested more time to complete its work and is expected to soon begin a formal study - more than a year after the safety legislation was signed into law (back story here and here).
The agency has now made plans for a large-scale study to assess whether adding instructions about...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1991562</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 25 Nov 2008 19:14:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1991562</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Concerns about ancestral DNA testing, by genetics society</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1964102&amp;cid=t_128705_131_f&amp;fid=34989&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.b5media.com%2F%7Er%2Fb5media%2FGeneticsHealth%2F%7E3%2FBuIMVNPbxjc%2F</link>
            <description>Did you know that Angelina Jolie is a distant cousin of Camilla the Duchess, Madonna, Shania Twain AND Hilary Clinton? 
&amp;#160; 
Man has an innate itch to find out where he came from, be it by evolution or ancestry. In a way it helps us connect with people from our past and gives us roots. So it&amp;#8217;s no surprise that DNA testing for ancestry or population of origin has mushroomed in the past few years with the growth of direct-to-consumer companies. 
Now, the American Society of Human Genetics is concerned about the implications of carrying out such tests without guidelines and oversight. The society presented a recommendation paper to the academe, and to the 30 companies involved in ancestral genetics testing. 
Image credit: Newscom
Some of those concerns include accuracy of markers use...</description>
            <author>Genetics and Health</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1964102</comments>
            <pubDate>Sat, 15 Nov 2008 12:33:53 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1964102</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Towards a unified policy on consumer genetic testing</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1930290&amp;cid=t_128705_131_f&amp;fid=34989&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.b5media.com%2F%7Er%2Fb5media%2FGeneticsHealth%2F%7E3%2FIFbwFQYEgUQ%2F</link>
            <description>With all the growing excitement, hype and inquiry surrounding personal genome testing, I was wondering when the National Institute of Health would join the fun. 
With a $600,000 grant from the NHRGI, the Genetics and Public Policy Center of Johns Hopkins will begin conducting studies to understand the new direct-to-consumer genetic testing industry. And it&amp;#8217;s about time.
Tags: direct-to-consumer, gene testing, genetics and public policy, nhgri, research, riskShare This (Source: Genetics and Health)</description>
            <author>Genetics and Health</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1930290</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 03 Nov 2008 23:49:36 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1930290</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Congress Probes Bayer Ads &amp; FDA Web Site</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1880157&amp;cid=t_128705_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2F420811435%2F</link>
            <description>As part of its ongoing investigation into direct-to-consumer advertising, the House Energy &amp;#038; Commerce Committee is exploring two new lines of inquiry - why Bayer ignored FDA recommendations to refrain from marketing a version of its aspirin that is also a dietary supplement, and why the FDA hired a public relations firm that works for pharma to develop a consumer web site.
The committee wants to know why Bayer promoted its Bayer Aspirin with Heart Advantage as safe and effective, when the FDA had warned against marketing such a combo. The tablet combines aspirin with a supplement Bayer claims can lower cholesterol. The FDA, however, only regulates the drug.
In a letter to Bayer Healthcare prez Gary Balkema, committee chairman John Dingell and Bart Stupak, who heads the Oversight and I...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1880157</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 14 Oct 2008 19:05:52 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1880157</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>EU Plan Gives Pharma Direct Access To Patients</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1852740&amp;cid=t_128705_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2F410212798%2F</link>
            <description>The proposal was endorsed by the European Union&amp;#8217;s Pharmaceutical Forum as part of an effort to provide more reliable medical advice at a time when the Internet allows widespread dissemination of questionable info, even as companies that develop drugs are prevented from circulating data.
However, the recommendation weakens current EU restrictions on contacts between drugmakers and patients, including a strict ban on US-style direct-to-consumer advertising, which critics say encourages the inappropriate use of medicines, The Financial Times writes.
The forum statement echoes draft legislation set to be published this month by Gunther Verheugen, the EU’s enterprise and industry commissioner, which would ease marketing rules and allow drugmakers to communicate to the general public in ...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1852740</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 03 Oct 2008 12:33:32 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1852740</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Congressman Warns DTC Tax Break May Get Axed</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1851211&amp;cid=t_128705_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2F409395623%2F</link>
            <description>Rahm Emanuel, an Illinois Democrat, warned advertising industry leaders that the business-tax deduction for DTC spending could be taken away in 2009 tax legislation, according to DTC Perspectives. 
In a recent meeting with the government affairs committee of the American Association of Advertising Agencies, the newsletter writes Emanuel presented two options for pharma in new tax legislation: retain the tax credit for R&amp;#038;D spending, or keep the business expense deduction for DTC ads - but not both.
“He said this without any tinge of satire, so you have to accept him at his word,” one ad industry advocate familiar with the meeting tells DTC Perspectives, which claims an average drugmaker spends roughly 10 times more on R&amp;#038;D each year than on consumer promotion (although we recal...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1851211</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 02 Oct 2008 16:26:22 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1851211</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>What Some Employers Think About Drug Prices</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1833426&amp;cid=t_128705_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2F402870703%2F</link>
            <description>Ask a human resource exec or benefit managers why drug prices keep rising and you&amp;#8217;re likely to hear them blame direct-to-consumer advertising. And why not? The ads are not only ubiquitous, but promote meds that are, generally, expensive.
This year, however, a survey of 100 companies with at least 1,000 employees finds that DTC advertising is generating fewer complaints. This year, 33 percent of the managers, vp&amp;#8217;s and directors queried blamed ads for the higher prices their employee benefit plans paid for meds. That&amp;#8217;s down from 45.5 percent in 2007 and 36 percent in 2006.
Instead, the blame is shifting to manufacturer price hikes - 13.4 percent cited this as a problem, compared with 6.9 percent last year, according to Arxcel, a pharmacy benefits consultant that sponsored t...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1833426</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 25 Sep 2008 15:06:56 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1833426</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Part III: Go Edupunk - Healthcare Incubators: Time to Burn or Become Steel</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1829942&amp;cid=t_128705_118_f&amp;fid=36984&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2F%7Er%2FHealthManagementRx%2F%7E3%2F402887668%2Fpart-iii-go-edupunk-healthcare.html</link>
            <description>Blogger's Note: Today I'm skipping around a bit during our week-long look at healthcare incubators.Before we look at when incubators in healthcare/startup health WON'T work, let's take a look at what's working from the business end of startup tech incubation. Part of the problem with incubation in startup health is that startup tech has been playing this game for at least 2 decades.As a result, they've got a cast of characters - expected players who will scoop in and pick off any smaller firms whose products and services they want to integrate.Want the ultimate exit? Look for acquisition by Google, Microsoft, Yahoo, etc.But it wasn't until earlier this year that Microsoft and Google's health interests pushed them into releasing PHRs. In health, we couldn't look to the big boys for adoption...</description>
            <author>Health Management Rx</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1829942</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 25 Sep 2008 13:59:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1829942</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Senate Holds Hearing On DTC Ads For Devices</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1802930&amp;cid=t_128705_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2F394684642%2F</link>
            <description>Normally, when you hear someone complain about direct-to-consumer advertising, it has to do with prescription drugs. But the Senate Special Committee on Aging believes there are just as many troubling issues when it comes to DTC ads for medical devices. So a hearing is scheduled for Wedneday morning.
The committee’s chairman, Herb Kohl, a Democrat from Wisconsin, tells The New York Times he&amp;#8217;s holding the hearing because he believes the FDA may have to increase scrutiny of device ads, much as it has done for drugs. &amp;#8220;The medical device industry is just beginning to get into the game,” he says.
DTC ads on TV and on the Internet amounted to $193 million last year, a small fraction of spending on drug ads, according to TNS Media Intelligence, a consulting firm, the paper writes....</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1802930</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 17 Sep 2008 03:23:40 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1802930</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>BLOGSCAN - FDA Hires Pharmaceutical Marketing Agency to Educate Consumers About Drug Advertising</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1794368&amp;cid=t_128705_87_f&amp;fid=34765&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhcrenewal.blogspot.com%2F2008%2F09%2Fblogscan-fda-hires-pharmaceutical.html</link>
            <description>On the GoozNews blog, Merrill Goozner posted about how the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) set up a program to educate consumers about direct-to-consumer (DTC) advertising. It seems that the organization the FDA hired for this purpose is nominally a not-for-profit, but not registered as such with the federal government, and is run by the president of a pharmaceutical marketing agency. The not-for-profit was funded mainly by the marketing agency, and its leadership all have connections with pharma. Sometimes, you just can't make this stuff up. Meanwhile, on the PostScript blog, this post assessed the content of the web-site provided by this program. The site is, shall we say, not terribly skeptical about how the pharmaceutical industry advertises drugs. But what did we expect, given w...</description>
            <author>Health Care Renewal</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1794368</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 15 Sep 2008 19:49:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1794368</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>FDA Tapped Pharma Consultant For DTC Web Site</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1798526&amp;cid=t_128705_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2F393208721%2F</link>
            <description>The agency hired a non-profit that is run by Michael Shaw, an advertising consultant to the pharmaceutical industry, to help design a new consumer campaign about direct-to-consumer advertising, Integrity in Science Watch reports. (Here is the press release).
The FDA’s new website, “Be Smart About Prescription Drug Advertising: A Guide for Consumers,” was developed by EthicAd, a non-profit based in Atlanta that, on its web site, claims to be independent and does not accept industry funding. However, ISW notes the organization is based in the same offices as Shaw Science Partners. The client list includes many familiar big pharma names and the site takes credit for helping to launch numerous drugs, including Viagra, Celebrex, Zoloft, Abilify and Avastin. 
The new FDA, which claims DTC ...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1798526</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 15 Sep 2008 13:37:37 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1798526</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The New Lipitor Ad: Look, Ma, No Celebrities!</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1760171&amp;cid=t_128705_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2F381287167%2F</link>
            <description>File this under fanfare for the common man. Bruised and battered by the controversy over ads featuring Robert Jarvik - known for inventing the artificial heart but not for writing prescriptions - Pfizer today debuts a new ad featuring someone with a lower profile. In this case, it&amp;#8217;s John Erlendson, a 58-year-old talent agent who suffered a heart attack and hadn&amp;#8217;t been taking a cholesterol pill.
&amp;#8220;When we did testing with consumers, what we found out was John really resonated with them,&amp;#8221; Jim Sage, senior director and leader of the Lipitor marketing team at Pfizer, tells The Wall Street Journal. He declined to say how much is being spent on the new campaign but it will have a wide presence on TV and in print. &amp;#8220;This ad is going to run for a while on a national bas...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1760171</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 02 Sep 2008 11:34:53 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1760171</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Do DTC Ads Help Sales? Not Really…</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1760174&amp;cid=t_128705_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2F381267368%2F</link>
            <description>Even though drugmakers spent an estimated $3 billion in 2005 on those DTC ads in the US, the effort apparently failed to result in more prescriptions, according to researchers at Harvard University and the University of Alberta.
&amp;#8220;People tend to think that if direct-to-consumer advertising wasn&amp;#8217;t effective, pharma wouldn&amp;#8217;t be doing it,&amp;#8221; Harvard Medical School&amp;#8217;s Stephen Soumerai says in a statement. &amp;#8220;But as it turns out, decisions to market directly to consumers are based on scant data.&amp;#8221;
The researchers used French-speaking Quebec residents as their control group. Although DTC ads are illegal in Canada, English-dominant Canadians see a great deal of US advertising, but French-speaking Quebecois see far less and get most of their news from French-lang...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1760174</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 02 Sep 2008 10:46:03 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1760174</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Drugmakers: Moratorium On Advertising New Drugs</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1522434&amp;cid=t_128705_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2F313428042%2F</link>
            <description>Under pressure from Washington, Merck, Johnson &amp;#038; Johnson and Pfizer are agreeing a six-month moratorium on advertising new drugs to consumers and will limit how docs are used in their ads, Advertising Age reports. 
The changes were unveiled today in letters they sent the House Energy and Commerce Committee responding to a request from committee the chairman John Dingell, a Michigan Democrat and, Bart Stupak, another Michigan Democrat who heads the committee&amp;#8217;s oversight and investigations panel, according to the mag. 
Dingell and Stupak had wanted a two-year voluntary moratorium on advertising new meds to consumers, and possibly even longer in the case of drugs for which not all studies have been completed, Ad Age ads. The lawmakers also asked the drugmakers to limit the use of d...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1522434</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 17 Jun 2008 01:06:52 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1522434</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Pharma Lobbies DC For Off-Label Rights</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1382619&amp;cid=t_128705_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2F272818314%2F</link>
            <description>Drugmakers are descending on Washington to protect their freedom to advertise meds directly to consumers and push for looser government restrictions on off-label promotion, The Wall Street Journal writes.
Ten drugmakers, including Pfizer, Bayer Corp, AstraZeneca and Johnson &amp;#038; Johnson have formed a coalition to push for looser off-label restrictions and will submit their arguments today to the FDA, which has been soliciting comments on its proposed off-label promotion guidelines. They are represented by former FDA Chief Counsel Daniel Troy, who is working with public-relations giant APCO Worldwide. Patient-advocacy organizations such as the National Alliance on Mental Illness and the National Organization for Rare Disorders are also members.
The new coalition supports the ability of dr...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1382619</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 18 Apr 2008 11:12:09 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1382619</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Monthly 'Miracle' or Annual(e) Terror -- SNL takes on DTC Pharma ads</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1270579&amp;cid=t_128705_87_f&amp;fid=35052&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2F%7Er%2FWomensBioethicsBlog%2F%7E5%2F243969174%2F47c999a65d15c271</link>
            <description>On a dark and snowy winter's day in New England, with spring nowhere in sight, and in desperate need for something that would lift my spirits (other than dark chocolate or coffee), I stumbled across...

[[ This is a content summary only. Visit my website for full links, other content, and more! ]] (Source: Women's Bioethics Blog)</description>
            <author>Women's Bioethics Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1270579</comments>
            <pubDate>Sat, 01 Mar 2008 18:19:37 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1270579</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Rower Mis-Impresses? - Pfizer Ends its Lipitor Advertising Campaign</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1269561&amp;cid=t_128705_87_f&amp;fid=34765&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhcrenewal.blogspot.com%2F2008%2F02%2Frower-mis-impresses-pfizer-ends-its.html</link>
            <description>We posted last week about misleading aspects of the Pfizer Inc US television advertising campaign for Lipitor (atorvastatin), some of which were recently discovered by NY Times reporter Stephanie Saul. The ads centered on Dr Robert Jarvik. They touted him as a physician with great expertise about the heart. However, although Dr Jarvik does have an MD, he never was an intern or resident, never got a medical license, and never practiced medicine. Dr Jarvik's career is that of an inventor and biomedical engineer. Furthermore, the ads gave the impression that Dr Jarvik is tremendously fit, showing him jogging and apparently rowing a racing scull. However, a body double, not Dr Jarvik, was rowing the boat.This week, Pfizer cancelled the advertising campaign. As reported again in the NY Times by...</description>
            <author>Health Care Renewal</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1269561</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 29 Feb 2008 20:36:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1269561</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Rowing Aground - More on Dr Jarvik's Misleading Advertisements</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1216479&amp;cid=t_128705_87_f&amp;fid=34765&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhcrenewal.blogspot.com%2F2008%2F02%2Frowing-aground-more-on-dr-jarviks.html</link>
            <description>On US television, the ads for Lipitor (atorvastatin, by Pfizer) featuring Dr Robert Jarvik are hard to avoid. In them, Dr Jarvik introduces himself as &quot;Doctor,&quot; attests to the years has spent &quot;studying the heart,&quot; attests to the value of Lipitor, which he takes himself, and is shown jogging, and apparently rowing a racing scull. Concerns about these ads yhave now hit the big time. Stephanie Saul reported in the New York Times that not only, as we briefly mentioned, is Dr Jarvik &quot;not a cardiologist and is not licensed to practice medicine,&quot; but that he does not know how to row. The images that seemed to be of Jarvik rowing the boat were combined from videos of a &quot;body double,&quot; and of Dr Jarvik in a boat held fixed to a platform.Why is this a serious matter? Pharmaceutical companies contend ...</description>
            <author>Health Care Renewal</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1216479</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 07 Feb 2008 21:53:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1216479</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Will FDA TV Ad Reviews Face Court Challenges?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1027237&amp;cid=t_128705_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2F184840385%2F</link>
            <description>That&amp;#8217;s what some wags are saying about the provision in the recently enacted FDA Amendments Act. One item in the legislation allows the FDA to delay a TV ad while agency staffers conduct a review and decide whether anything must be changed, such as disclosing serious risks.
This language was inserted in favor tougher wording that, originally, would have given the FDA authority to block a drugmaker from advertising a med that carried serious safety concerns. But that was removed over constitutional concerns. Now, though, some lawyers tell FDALegislativeWatch that the softer provision may also have trouble passing constitutional muster. The FDA&amp;#8217;s authority &amp;#8220;likely will be tested at some point in the courts,&amp;#8221; David Ogden of WilmerHale tells the newsletter (subscription...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1027237</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 14 Nov 2007 22:13:30 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1027237</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>&quot;Yee Hah&quot; Direct to Consumer Advertising</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=877510&amp;cid=t_128705_87_f&amp;fid=34765&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhcrenewal.blogspot.com%2F2007%2F09%2Fyee-hah-direct-to-consumer-advertising.html</link>
            <description>An editorialist at The Day (New London, CT) had some choice comments about the current direct to consumer (DCT) advertising of Viagra (sildenafil), the erectile dysfunction (ED) drug made by Pfizer Inc.Pfizer Inc. denies it, but it sure appears it no longer markets Viagra as simply medicine, but encourages recreational use by projecting an aphrodisiac-like image.In 2005 Pfizer and other pharmaceutical companies peddling male impotence drugs toned down their advertising after the Food and Drug Administration criticized sexually-suggestive commercials that paid little attention to the medical problem the drugs are intended to address — erectile dysfunction (ED).Pfizer, which had run TV advertisements of men growing blue devilish horns when the Viagra logo appeared, turned in late 2005 to c...</description>
            <author>Health Care Renewal</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=877510</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 17 Sep 2007 19:45:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">877510</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>NYT and WSJ cover Myriad's campaign</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=865677&amp;cid=t_128705_131_f&amp;fid=35743&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fthegenesherpa.blogspot.com%2F2007%2F09%2Fnyt-and-wsj-cover-myriads-campaign.html</link>
            <description>I have been silent on this for too long. Why? I was awaiting the review by my attorneys. The last thing I need is another threat of litigation. Why litigate? Because, critics like myself and the esteemed Ellen Matloff from Yale :) have been telling physicians that testing for BRCA ain't like checking a sodium.....or even better a pregnancy test.Why can you get a pregnancy test over the counter? Because its results are crystal clear. The FDA has requirements for OTC testing. This whole issue was raised with at home HIV testing. The issues were portrayed here.The interesting questions poses include these.What test characteristics favor possible approval of an OTC home-use HIV test? • The test is simple to use compared to other types of HIV tests and earlier versions of rapid HIV tests, sug...</description>
            <author>Gene Sherpas: Personalized Medicine and You</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=865677</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 11 Sep 2007 23:21:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">865677</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>American Society of Human Genetics speaks out on DTC testing</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=786015&amp;cid=t_128705_131_f&amp;fid=35743&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fthegenesherpa.blogspot.com%2F2007%2F08%2Famerican-society-of-human-genetics.html</link>
            <description>After a wonderful conference call with some friends regarding the future of personal genomes, I was heartened to see ASHG put out a statement on Direct To Consumer (DTC) testing. Here is what these learned individuals say.Currently, DTC genetic testing is permitted in about half thestates2 and is subject to little oversight at the federal level. In July2006, the Government Accountability Office issued a report documentingtroubling marketing practices by some DTC testingcompanies,3 and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) issued aconsumer alert cautioning consumers to be skeptical about claimsmade by some DTC companiesWhile DTC testing also encompasses paternity and ancestry testing,this policy statement addresses solely those genetic tests thatmake health-related claims or that directly affe...</description>
            <author>Gene Sherpas: Personalized Medicine and You</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=786015</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 07 Aug 2007 21:48:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">786015</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>BLOGSCAN - Even European Pharma Execs Don't Like DTC Advertising</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=740425&amp;cid=t_128705_87_f&amp;fid=34765&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhcrenewal.blogspot.com%2F2007%2F07%2Fblogscan-even-european-pharma-execs.html</link>
            <description>On BrandweekNRX is a fascinating post on the disdain European pharmaceutical executives have for direct to patient (DCT) pharma advertising. On UK executive even said &quot;that American drug advertising was regarded as so excessive in the UK that it had actually nixed the chances of UK drug companies being allowed to conduct similar promotions.&quot;And the post started with a link to Question Authority with Dr Peter Rost which cited a commentary in a left-wing Swedish newspaper in which a Swedish Pfizer executive called DTC advertising &quot;a bad model for Sweden.&quot;So why do American pharma executives swear by DTC advertising? Are they dumber than their European counterparts, or are American consumers more gullible than European consumers? (Source: Health Care Renewal)</description>
            <author>Health Care Renewal</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=740425</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 17 Jul 2007 20:39:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">740425</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Britain Needs A Sherpa!</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=708896&amp;cid=t_128705_131_f&amp;fid=35743&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fthegenesherpa.blogspot.com%2F2007%2F07%2Fbritain-needs-sherpa.html</link>
            <description>I just received an email from a reader who pointed my attention towards a popular morning program in the UK. They interviewed a person who had taken a genetic risk test despite the significant cost (I am uncertain of the test). The costs online are up to 1000 pounds, almost 2000 USD! She did this simply because she was concerned about pancreatic cancer (her father had died of it as age 69). She announced that she was free of the risk of pancreatic cancer but had learned that she shouldn't take HRT and had stopped it. She had also learned that she was at risk for age-related Alzhemers' (although the discussion wasn't at all clear&quot;. The discussion ended with the enthusiasm for the testing from doctor who is associated with the TV show and a call from the lay-woman that such comprehensive scr...</description>
            <author>Gene Sherpas: Personalized Medicine and You</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=708896</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 02 Jul 2007 14:45:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">708896</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>a touch of grey, kinda suits you anyway…</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=707394&amp;cid=t_128705_140_f&amp;fid=35448&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fseemedlikeagoodideathetime.com%2F2007%2F07%2F01%2Ftouch-of-grey-suits-you-anyway%2F</link>
            <description>U.S.Hospital, Doctor visits balloon&amp;#8230;
&amp;#8220;That&amp;#8217;s a 20 percent increase in the just the last five years &amp;#8212; a huge number,&amp;#8221; said Burt. &amp;#8220;I can tell you that the number of hospitals and physicians has not increased 20 percent.&amp;#8221;
The reason is clear &amp;#8212; Americans are getting older. &amp;#8220;When you reach 50 things start going wrong, just little by little, and you keep going back to the doctors,&amp;#8221; Burt said.&amp;#8221;
I&amp;#8217;m calling bullshit on a few things here.

First off, this &amp;#8220;boomer thing&amp;#8221; what&amp;#8217;s up with the moving the birth-date years around? When that term was first coined, it meant people born during WWII and the 50&amp;#8217;s&amp;#8230;..no way am I included in the same generation as my parents! (just had to clear that up, I despise...</description>
            <author>bipolar chicks blogging</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=707394</comments>
            <pubDate>Sun, 01 Jul 2007 16:08:17 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">707394</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Educational DTC Drug Advertisements: &quot;Minky  Viagra Noni Noni Boo-Boo Plats&quot;</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=582755&amp;cid=t_128705_87_f&amp;fid=34765&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhcrenewal.blogspot.com%2F2007%2F04%2Feducational-dtc-drug-advertisements.html</link>
            <description>We have posted before (most recently here) about the need to be very skeptical about direct-to-consumer (DTC) pharmaceutical advertising. On the other hand, DTC proponents often claim that the ads are valuable because they are educational. However, Alex Berenson just reported in the New York Times on television ads by Pfizer Inc for Viagra now being aired in Canada,The ads feature middle-aged men and women talking in a made-up language, save for one word.'Viagra spanglecheff?' says a man to a friend at a bowling alley.'Spanglecheff?' his friend asks.'Minky Viagra noni noni boo-boo plats!' the first man replies, with a grin that suggests he is not talking about the drug’s side effects. The ads end with the slogan, 'The International Language of Viagra.'I cannot wait to hear from Pfizer ho...</description>
            <author>Health Care Renewal</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=582755</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 30 Apr 2007 20:57:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">582755</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Butterfly Runs Into Flak: Critically Analyzing Lunesta's Television Ad</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=547256&amp;cid=t_128705_87_f&amp;fid=34765&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhcrenewal.blogspot.com%2F2007%2F04%2Fbutterfly-runs-into-flak-critically.html</link>
            <description>National Public Radio's show &quot;All Things Considered&quot; ran a segment last week explaining how direct to consumer (DTC) advertising can make drugs appear better than they may really be.The show focused on a single television advertisement (with the butterfly) for Lunesta (eszopiclone) marketed by Sepracor for insomnia. The show focused first on the psychology of advertising design, pointing out the following features:Using Images to &quot;Sell You a Feeling&quot; - The advertisement shows a lovely woman waking up after an apparently restful sleep produced by Lunesta. A former TV producer commented, &quot;and when she wakes up, she's just gorgeous. She sits right up and stretches and looks great. Who wouldn't want that?&quot; Thus, &quot;you remember what you feel longer than what you know.&quot; So the image of restful sl...</description>
            <author>Health Care Renewal</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=547256</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 16 Apr 2007 21:25:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">547256</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Video: Virtual Genomic Counseling vs. Face-to-Face</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=481454&amp;cid=t_128705_131_f&amp;fid=34975&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2F%7Er%2FThePersonalGenome%2F%7E3%2F98014845%2Fvideo_virtual_g.html</link>
            <description>The PBS television station KQED in San Francisco recently aired a very thoughtful segment comparing online genomic counseling through DNA Direct to traditional face-to-face counseling via UCSF.&amp;nbsp; Check it out:

 

--KQED, Genetic Testing through the Web. Feb 20, 2007.Full discolure: I am employed by DNA Direct. (Source: The Personal Genome)</description>
            <author>The Personal Genome</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=481454</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 01 Mar 2007 05:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">481454</guid>        </item>
    </channel>
</rss>

