On Wed, 11 Feb 2009 20:17:41 -0800, Terry Pulliam Burd wrote:

> On Wed, 11 Feb 2009 10:38:53 -0800 (PST), Nancy2
> > fired up random neurons and synapses to
> opine:
>
>>On Feb 11, 11:52*am, Lynn from Fargo > wrote:
>>> On Feb 11, 11:15*am, "Dimitri" > wrote:
>
>>> OK - Here's Lynn on her soapbox . . .
>>> Advertising prescription drugs to potential consumers is immoral and
>>> frequently offensive. *Hundreds of millions of dollars are spent by
>>> pharmaceutical companies to elicit billions and billions of dollars in
>>> profits. *I believe that is criminal. And I know that it disgusts me.
>>> Lynn in Fargo- Hide quoted text -
>>>
>>> - Show quoted text -
>>
>>I hope you have space on that soapbox for me. I hate that the drug
>>companies spend billions on TV advertising aimed at the lowest common
>>denominator.
>
> Our GP told the DH that he actually has people coming into his office
> asking for Brand Du Jour, essentially self-diagnosing and
> self-prescribing. I cannot for the life of me understand why drug
> companies are allowed to advertise - it jacks up the price of already
> expensive drugs and advertises to an audience that doesn't have
> prescription pad authority. Why? So the patient goes to his doctor and
> insists that he be given a prescription for Brand Du Jour, because the
> TV advertising genie trumps the doctor.
>

it *was* illegal at one time. the new regime is one of the wonders of
deregulation.

your pal,
blake