Have you seen the newest Enbrel commercial?

It opens with a woman saying, "I knew rheumatoid arthritis was painful, but
I didn't know it could attack my joints!"

I you have RA you would know where the pain is coming from. DUH!

I just think the ad agency must think people with RA are idiots.

I am not sure what you think but I think its insulting.

Lets see what else we can come up with.

"I knew a fracture was painful but I didn't know it involved my bones.

Dimitri

On Feb 11, 11:15 am, "Dimitri" > wrote:
> Have you seen the newest Enbrel commercial?
>
> It opens with a woman saying, "I knew rheumatoid arthritis was painful, but
> I didn't know it could attack my joints!"
>
> I you have RA you would know where the pain is coming from. DUH!
>
> I just think the ad agency must think people with RA are idiots.
>
> I am not sure what you think but I think its insulting.
>
> Lets see what else we can come up with.
>
> "I knew a fracture was painful but I didn't know it involved my bones.
>
> Dimitri

The most insulting ones by far, are all the ones where the person's
child (teenager or whatever) blithely informs the sufferer about new
medications, new medical information, etc., that they apparently have
found on the web. Yeah, right. Second worst ones are the ones which
show that the woman always needs help from either the husband or the
son to find out medical information.

N.

"Nancy2" > wrote in message
...
>
> The most insulting ones by far, are all the ones where the person's
> child (teenager or whatever) blithely informs the sufferer about new
> medications, new medical information, etc., that they apparently have
> found on the web. Yeah, right. Second worst ones are the ones which
> show that the woman always needs help from either the husband or the
> son to find out medical information.

Yes! I'd like to strangle the kid who shows his simpering mom the
information he found on the internet about the disease du jour.

Felice

Nancy2 wrote:

> On Feb 11, 11:15 am, "Dimitri" > wrote:
> > Have you seen the newest Enbrel commercial?
> >
> > It opens with a woman saying, "I knew rheumatoid arthritis was painful,
but
> > I didn't know it could attack my joints!"
> >
> > I you have RA you would know where the pain is coming from. DUH!
> >
> > I just think the ad agency must think people with RA are idiots.
> >
> > I am not sure what you think but I think its insulting.
> >
> > Lets see what else we can come up with.
> >
> > "I knew a fracture was painful but I didn't know it involved my bones.
> >
> > Dimitri
>
> The most insulting ones by far, are all the ones where the person's
> child (teenager or whatever) blithely informs the sufferer about new
> medications, new medical information, etc., that they apparently have
> found on the web. Yeah, right. Second worst ones are the ones which
> show that the woman always needs help from either the husband or the
> son to find out medical information.


ALL of the "geezer - centric" medical ads are incredibly lame and seem
targeted towards morons...makes watching the nightly network nooze almost
unbearable. Bring back cigarette commercials I say...


--
Best
Greg

On Feb 11, 11:15*am, "Dimitri" > wrote:
> Have you seen the newest Enbrel commercial?
>
> It opens with a woman saying, "I knew rheumatoid arthritis was painful, but
> I didn't know it could attack my joints!"
>
> I you have RA you would know where the pain is coming from. *DUH!
>
> I just think the ad agency must think people with RA are idiots.
>
> I am not sure what you think but I think its insulting.
>
> Lets see what else we can come up with.
>
> "I knew a fracture was painful but I didn't know it involved my bones.
>
> Dimitri

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

Felice wrote:
> "Nancy2" > wrote

>> The most insulting ones by far, are all the ones where the person's
>> child (teenager or whatever) blithely informs the sufferer about new
>> medications, new medical information, etc., that they apparently have
>> found on the web. Yeah, right. Second worst ones are the ones which
>> show that the woman always needs help from either the husband or the
>> son to find out medical information.
>
> Yes! I'd like to strangle the kid who shows his simpering mom the
> information he found on the internet about the disease du jour.

How about the one where the woman goes on and on about
how much they need life insurance for all their final bills. The
husband lets her go on and on then informs her he already took
care of it.

nancy

Dimitri wrote:
> Have you seen the newest Enbrel commercial?
>
> It opens with a woman saying, "I knew rheumatoid arthritis was painful,
> but I didn't know it could attack my joints!"

Yes, DOH! They get worse and worse.


AFAIAC the most insulting is any one that tells you to "ask"
your doctor for a Rx for a new med. Why bother to go to a doctor?
Just steal a prescription pad and prescribe them all for yourself.

I much prefer to go to the doctor informed but let HIM do the
diagnosing and prescribing, after I ask a few questions. He's
never steered me wrong so far.

gloria p

On Feb 11, 11:52*am, Lynn from Fargo > wrote:
> On Feb 11, 11:15*am, "Dimitri" > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Have you seen the newest Enbrel commercial?
>
> > It opens with a woman saying, "I knew rheumatoid arthritis was painful, but
> > I didn't know it could attack my joints!"
>
> > I you have RA you would know where the pain is coming from. *DUH!
>
> > I just think the ad agency must think people with RA are idiots.
>
> > I am not sure what you think but I think its insulting.
>
> > Lets see what else we can come up with.
>
> > "I knew a fracture was painful but I didn't know it involved my bones.
>
> > Dimitri
>
> 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.

N.

Lynn from Fargo 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

I am not so sure that it is not a bad idea for people to be aware of
medications that might be of some benefit to them. It might even
inspire some people to go and see a doctor about a condition in time for
it to be treated. An added benefit is that the ads tell of the possible
side effects of the medication. Most doctors don't go into great detail
about those side effects. Besides, it may be preferable to some of the
other practises used by drug companies. I have heard it said that
pharmacists know which drug company sales reps have been in town by the
prescriptions they are filling. They use all sorts of enticements to
get doctors to prescribe their products.



It wasn't so long ago that some people were terribly offended by adds
for feminine hygiene products. Yet, if it weren't for those adds, some
women would not be aware that those types of products were even available.

Gloria P wrote:
>
>
> AFAIAC the most insulting is any one that tells you to "ask"
> your doctor for a Rx for a new med. Why bother to go to a doctor?
> Just steal a prescription pad and prescribe them all for yourself.
>
> I much prefer to go to the doctor informed but let HIM do the
> diagnosing and prescribing, after I ask a few questions. He's
> never steered me wrong so far.

Would you prefer to get a prescription for a drug that you have been
informed about and heard the risks of, or would you prefer to get a
prescription for a drug from a company whose salesman just took the
doctor out for a nice dinner, gave him some pens, mugs and a bunch of
free samples?

"Dimitri" > wrote in message
...
> Have you seen the newest Enbrel commercial?
>
> It opens with a woman saying, "I knew rheumatoid arthritis was painful,
> but I didn't know it could attack my joints!"
>
> I you have RA you would know where the pain is coming from. DUH!

I took the ad to mean attack = destroy rather than attack = merely cause
pain.
<shrug>

Dave Smith wrote:
> Gloria P wrote:
>>

>>
>> I much prefer to go to the doctor informed but let HIM do the
>> diagnosing and prescribing, after I ask a few questions. He's
>> never steered me wrong so far.
>
> Would you prefer to get a prescription for a drug that you have been
> informed about and heard the risks of, or would you prefer to get a
> prescription for a drug from a company whose salesman just took the
> doctor out for a nice dinner, gave him some pens, mugs and a bunch of
> free samples?


How "informed" do you feel after the glitzy commercials for drugs?
The only valid parts seem to me to be the side-effects warnings.

gloria p

Dave Smith wrote:
> Would you prefer to get a prescription for a drug that you have been
> informed about and heard the risks of, or would you prefer to get a
> prescription for a drug from a company whose salesman just took the
> doctor out for a nice dinner, gave him some pens, mugs and a bunch of
> free samples?

There are limits on how much of that goes on now. Meals, pens, mugs and
free samples alone are not educational, and the focus for Pharma groups
now is education over blatant promotion.

Of course, the educational programs put on by pharmaceutical companies
is barely-disguised promotion, but there is some genuinely informative
content as well.

On Feb 11, 12:54*pm, Dave Smith
> wrote:
> Gloria P wrote:
>
> > AFAIAC the most insulting is any one that tells you to "ask"
> > your doctor for a Rx for a new med. *Why bother to go to a doctor?
> > Just steal a prescription pad and prescribe them all for yourself.
>
> > I much prefer to go to the doctor informed but let HIM do the
> > diagnosing and prescribing, after I ask a few questions. *He's
> > never steered me wrong so far.
>
> Would you prefer to get a prescription for a drug that you have been
> informed about and heard the risks of, or would you prefer to get a
> prescription for a drug from a company whose salesman just took the
> doctor out for a nice dinner, gave him some pens, mugs and a bunch of
> free samples?

I don't think anyone listens to those caveats in the TV commercials.
Especially egregious are the commercials where there is a pretend set
up with a fake doctor talking to a patient and lists the potential
problems. In any event, most of those warnings are spoken so fast,
one can't even understand what they are saying. I just absolutely mute
my TV every time one of those comes on. Any reasonably bright person
would know to call a doctor if something unusual occurred after taking
medication.

I'd rather not have all that money spent on commercials, thanks,
regardless of what the salesman does or doesn't do for my doctor. I
trust him implicitly.

N.

Lynn from Fargo 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.


I don't believe it's immoral, but I do believe it's irresponsible.
Prescribers are already aware of new meds and procedures long before the
commercial makes the air, and have already decided whether they are
right for a patients condition.

I do believe that the drug companies outrageous profits generated by
advertising and promotions to lay audiences *are* criminal, given the
price of medications. I don't care when they go on and on about how much
money is invested in R&D, because it pales by comparison to how much the
CEO takes home.

"Dave Smith" > wrote in message
...
> Lynn from Fargo 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
>
> I am not so sure that it is not a bad idea for people to be aware of
> medications that might be of some benefit to them. It might even inspire
> some people to go and see a doctor about a condition in time for it to be
> treated. An added benefit is that the ads tell of the possible side
> effects of the medication. Most doctors don't go into great detail about
> those side effects. Besides, it may be preferable to some of the other
> practises used by drug companies. I have heard it said that pharmacists
> know which drug company sales reps have been in town by the prescriptions
> they are filling. They use all sorts of enticements to get doctors to
> prescribe their products.
>
>
>
> It wasn't so long ago that some people were terribly offended by adds for
> feminine hygiene products. Yet, if it weren't for those adds, some women
> would not be aware that those types of products were even available.

Are you kidding me?! Perhaps MEN might not be aware of the different types
of products, but you're completely out of touch with reality if you think a
woman wouldn't. How patronizing.

Jinx

Gloria P wrote:

> How "informed" do you feel after the glitzy commercials for drugs?
> The only valid parts seem to me to be the side-effects warnings.

It's funny to hear how cheerful and upbeat they can sound
while telling you that 'in some cases' side effects such as
death can occur.

nancy

Gloria P wrote:
> Dave Smith wrote:
>> Gloria P wrote:
>>>
>
>>>
>>> I much prefer to go to the doctor informed but let HIM do the
>>> diagnosing and prescribing, after I ask a few questions. He's
>>> never steered me wrong so far.
>>
>> Would you prefer to get a prescription for a drug that you have been
>> informed about and heard the risks of, or would you prefer to get a
>> prescription for a drug from a company whose salesman just took the
>> doctor out for a nice dinner, gave him some pens, mugs and a bunch of
>> free samples?
>
>
> How "informed" do you feel after the glitzy commercials for drugs?
> The only valid parts seem to me to be the side-effects warnings.
>
I think that I feel well enough informed to at least ask my doctor about
the drug.... if it deals with a condition I suffer from.

Jinx replied:

>> It wasn't so long ago that some people were terribly offended by adds for
>> feminine hygiene products. Yet, if it weren't for those adds, some women
>> would not be aware that those types of products were even available.
>
> Are you kidding me?! Perhaps MEN might not be aware of the different
> types of products, but you're completely out of touch with reality if you
> think a woman wouldn't. How patronizing.

Haven't you ever seen "Carrie"?

Bob

On Feb 11, 12:48*pm, "Gregory Morrow" > wrote:

> ALL of the "geezer - centric" medical ads are incredibly lame and seem
> targeted towards morons...makes watching the nightly network nooze almost
> unbearable. *Bring back cigarette commercials I say...

The worst are the beds, sit down baths, and cheap life insurance
without a medical. Bring back robot insurance ads.

(FYI, that was a Sam Waterston fake ad on SNL. Couldn't find it on
YouTube)

On Wed, 11 Feb 2009 09:15:11 -0800, "Dimitri" >
wrote:

>Have you seen the newest Enbrel commercial?
>
>It opens with a woman saying, "I knew rheumatoid arthritis was painful, but
>I didn't know it could attack my joints!"
>
>I you have RA you would know where the pain is coming from. DUH!
>
>I just think the ad agency must think people with RA are idiots.
>
>I am not sure what you think but I think its insulting.
>
>Lets see what else we can come up with.
>
>"I knew a fracture was painful but I didn't know it involved my bones.
>
>Dimitri
>
>
Most of your "snake oil" commercials are fairly insulting to begin
with. There must be a lot of gullible people in the world because
those peddlers are spending a lot of money to hawk their wares on TV.
Now if you really want to get into distasteful commercials let's go
with the one with a couple in the canoe where the boat springs a leak
and the girl plugs it with a tampon. For some reason I find this
commercial tasteless.

Lynn 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.

While I am offended by 99% of television ads, I have to say that I think the
public *should* know about Gardasil.

Bob

Jinx Minx wrote:
>
>> It wasn't so long ago that some people were terribly offended by adds for
>> feminine hygiene products. Yet, if it weren't for those adds, some women
>> would not be aware that those types of products were even available.
>
> Are you kidding me?! Perhaps MEN might not be aware of the different types
> of products, but you're completely out of touch with reality if you think a
> woman wouldn't. How patronizing.


No I am not kidding, and it was women who seemed to be the most offended
by them. My mother in law was quite irritated when my sister in law
appeared in one for tampons. My wife disagreed with her. Being a special
ed teacher at the time, and having been a social worker, she was the one
who suggested to me that there would be women out there who didn't know.
She cited the cases of girls raised by fathers who didn't know much
about the topic, or by strict parents who kept their kids in the dark,
or those who are just plain stupid. That was back in the 60s when stuff
like that was not discussed in public, the days when girls would have
their first period and not know what was happening.

"Gloria P" > wrote in message
...
> Dave Smith wrote:
>> Gloria P wrote:
>>>
>
>>>
>>> I much prefer to go to the doctor informed but let HIM do the
>>> diagnosing and prescribing, after I ask a few questions. He's
>>> never steered me wrong so far.
>>
>> Would you prefer to get a prescription for a drug that you have been
>> informed about and heard the risks of, or would you prefer to get a
>> prescription for a drug from a company whose salesman just took the
>> doctor out for a nice dinner, gave him some pens, mugs and a bunch of
>> free samples?
>
>
> How "informed" do you feel after the glitzy commercials for drugs?
> The only valid parts seem to me to be the side-effects warnings.
>
> gloria p


The side effects are often worse than the condition they're prescribed for.

Jill

"Nancy Young" > wrote in message
...
> Gloria P wrote:
>
>> How "informed" do you feel after the glitzy commercials for drugs?
>> The only valid parts seem to me to be the side-effects warnings.
>
> It's funny to hear how cheerful and upbeat they can sound
> while telling you that 'in some cases' side effects such as
> death can occur.
>
> nancy

Death -- just a wee side effect!

Felice

jmcquown wrote:
> "Gloria P" > wrote:
>> How "informed" do you feel after the glitzy commercials for drugs?
>> The only valid parts seem to me to be the side-effects warnings.
>>
>> gloria p
>
>
> The side effects are often worse than the condition they're prescribed for.

Do you have any of those conditions, Jill? The side effects may be manna
from heaven when compared to the effects of the diseases themselves.

Nancy Young wrote:
> It's funny to hear how cheerful and upbeat they can sound
> while telling you that 'in some cases' side effects such as
> death can occur.

They do seem unnaturally upbeat when describing the risk of death.
However, death is a possible side effect of any medication.

"Dave Smith" > wrote in message
m...
> Jinx Minx wrote:
>>
>>> It wasn't so long ago that some people were terribly offended by adds
>>> for feminine hygiene products. Yet, if it weren't for those adds, some
>>> women would not be aware that those types of products were even
>>> available.
>>
>> Are you kidding me?! Perhaps MEN might not be aware of the different
>> types of products, but you're completely out of touch with reality if you
>> think a woman wouldn't. How patronizing.
>
>
> No I am not kidding, and it was women who seemed to be the most offended
> by them. My mother in law was quite irritated when my sister in law
> appeared in one for tampons. My wife disagreed with her. Being a special
> ed teacher at the time, and having been a social worker, she was the one
> who suggested to me that there would be women out there who didn't know.
> She cited the cases of girls raised by fathers who didn't know much about
> the topic, or by strict parents who kept their kids in the dark, or those
> who are just plain stupid. That was back in the 60s when stuff like that
> was not discussed in public, the days when girls would have their first
> period and not know what was happening.

Well, that was 40 years ago. Times have changed. You no longer have to go
back to the pharmacy counter and embarassingly ask for a box of product like
it's a dirty subject.

Jinx

jmcquown wrote:

> The side effects are often worse than the condition they're
> prescribed for.

It's true. Seems there is a pill for everything, but take them then
you have a whole new set of problems (of course, there is a pill
for those, too, each with their own problems).

nancy

Felice wrote:
> "Nancy Young" > wrote

>> It's funny to hear how cheerful and upbeat they can sound
>> while telling you that 'in some cases' side effects such as
>> death can occur.

> Death -- just a wee side effect!

Contact your doctor if that occurs!

nancy

On 2009-02-11, > wrote:

> (FYI, that was a Sam Waterston fake ad on SNL. Couldn't find it on
> YouTube)

http://www.robotmarketplace.com/video_oldglory_hi.html


I've been a Sam Waterston fan ever since I'll Fly Away, but was shocked to
my toenails when I saw him in this old western playing an Indian. No
kidding, and barechested on a horse, no less. I think the movie was Eagle's
Wing from 1979. Whatta hoot.

nb

said...

> On Wed, 11 Feb 2009 09:15:11 -0800, "Dimitri" >
> wrote:
>
>>Have you seen the newest Enbrel commercial?
>>
>>It opens with a woman saying, "I knew rheumatoid arthritis was painful,
>>but I didn't know it could attack my joints!"
>>
>>I you have RA you would know where the pain is coming from. DUH!
>>
>>I just think the ad agency must think people with RA are idiots.
>>
>>I am not sure what you think but I think its insulting.
>>
>>Lets see what else we can come up with.
>>
>>"I knew a fracture was painful but I didn't know it involved my bones.
>>
>>Dimitri
>>
>>
>
> It might be insulting, but its still not as bad as all Billy Mays
> commercials. As soon as I hear that asshole, I mute or shut off the
> tv. I didnt get a tv for some asshole to scream at me. I will never
> buy any products that he advertises.


It's painfully obvious that the TV commercical Kreatives will insult the
viewing public at every opportunity. They can't stoop low enough.

The skin & bones sickly jerk with the headphone and microphone selling the
sham-wow is just about the worst! Now he's on the Slap-Chop food chopper.
He even get's away with "check out my nuts," as he chops up peanuts for an
ice cream topping.

Then there are those prescription pills that solve a problem but go on to
add a list of possible horrendous/fatal adverse effects. One description
actually said "may cause stuffy OR runny nose." WTF?!? The FDA is asleep at
the wheel.

They're all insulting:

Progressive's "airhead" brunette
The Geico gecko and the new bug-eye bundle of cash
The Allstate "Are you in good hands" guy
The sham-wow SHAM!
Billy Mays
The Extenz "airhead" "that certain part of the male anatomy" woman.
"Ask your doctor if you're healthy enough to have sex" Viagra warning!
THAT'S the way to GO!!! NO, I'd rather get run over by a train?!?
All the "Need Cash Now?" ads.
All cell phone commercials.
All fast food commercials.
All "not sold in stores" commercials.
All others.

Andy

"Felice" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Nancy Young" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Gloria P wrote:
>>
>>> How "informed" do you feel after the glitzy commercials for drugs?
>>> The only valid parts seem to me to be the side-effects warnings.
>>
>> It's funny to hear how cheerful and upbeat they can sound
>> while telling you that 'in some cases' side effects such as
>> death can occur.
>>
>> nancy
>
> Death -- just a wee side effect!
>
> Felice

Have a gander/listen to this ... by one of my favorite groups, The Austin
Lounge Lizards:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eZPZG92iYE4

(Excessive male lactation is my personal favorite of the side effects....)


TammyM (has a genu-whine progenitorivox writing pen given her by Boo
Resnik!)

"Gloria P" > wrote in message
...
> Dave Smith wrote:
>> Gloria P wrote:
>>>
>
>>>
>>> I much prefer to go to the doctor informed but let HIM do the
>>> diagnosing and prescribing, after I ask a few questions. He's
>>> never steered me wrong so far.
>>
>> Would you prefer to get a prescription for a drug that you have been
>> informed about and heard the risks of, or would you prefer to get a
>> prescription for a drug from a company whose salesman just took the
>> doctor out for a nice dinner, gave him some pens, mugs and a bunch of
>> free samples?
>
>
> How "informed" do you feel after the glitzy commercials for drugs?
> The only valid parts seem to me to be the side-effects warnings.
>

You mean the hushed voice talking at the speed of light?

useofthisdrugmayleadtoshortnessofbreathprojectilev omittingexplosivediarheaandinsomecasessuddendeathc ontactyourdoctorifyourerectionlastsmorethan5days.

Paul

TammyM wrote:
> "Felice" > wrote

>> "Nancy Young" > wrote

>>> Gloria P wrote:
>>>
>>>> How "informed" do you feel after the glitzy commercials for drugs?
>>>> The only valid parts seem to me to be the side-effects warnings.
>>>
>>> It's funny to hear how cheerful and upbeat they can sound
>>> while telling you that 'in some cases' side effects such as
>>> death can occur.

>> Death -- just a wee side effect!

> Have a gander/listen to this ... by one of my favorite groups, The
> Austin Lounge Lizards:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eZPZG92iYE4
>
> (Excessive male lactation is my personal favorite of the side
> effects....)
>
>
> TammyM (has a genu-whine progenitorivox writing pen given her by Boo
> Resnik!)

Hilarious.

nancy (eyeball poppin')

TammyM said...

> Have a gander/listen to this ... by one of my favorite groups, The Austin
> Lounge Lizards:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eZPZG92iYE4
>
> (Excessive male lactation is my personal favorite of the side
effects....)
>
>
> TammyM (has a genu-whine progenitorivox writing pen given her by Boo
> Resnik!)


TammyM,

LOLOL!!!

Now THAT should air on every channel once an hour!!!

Great!

Thanks!

Andy

Andy opined:

> The skin & bones sickly jerk with the headphone and microphone selling the
> sham-wow is just about the worst! Now he's on the Slap-Chop food chopper.
> He even get's away with "check out my nuts," as he chops up peanuts for an
> ice cream topping.

Are you a Scientologist? Vince Offer (the ShamWow guy) is in a legal battle
with the Church of Scientology after they blacklisted him.

Bob

Bob Terwilliger said...

> Andy opined:
>
>> The skin & bones sickly jerk with the headphone and microphone selling
the
>> sham-wow is just about the worst! Now he's on the Slap-Chop food
chopper.
>> He even get's away with "check out my nuts," as he chops up peanuts for
an
>> ice cream topping.
>
> Are you a Scientologist? Vince Offer (the ShamWow guy) is in a legal
battle
> with the Church of Scientology after they blacklisted him.
>
> Bob


Bob,

No I'm not.

Somehow, if at all possible, I don't want either of them to win!

Best,

Andy

Jinx Minx wrote:

>> No I am not kidding, and it was women who seemed to be the most offended
>> by them. My mother in law was quite irritated when my sister in law
>> appeared in one for tampons. My wife disagreed with her. Being a special
>> ed teacher at the time, and having been a social worker, she was the one
>> who suggested to me that there would be women out there who didn't know.
>> She cited the cases of girls raised by fathers who didn't know much about
>> the topic, or by strict parents who kept their kids in the dark, or those
>> who are just plain stupid. That was back in the 60s when stuff like that
>> was not discussed in public, the days when girls would have their first
>> period and not know what was happening.
>
> Well, that was 40 years ago. Times have changed. You no longer have to go
> back to the pharmacy counter and embarassingly ask for a box of product like
> it's a dirty subject.

You're right. It was 40 year ago, and it was a taboo topic. Thanks to
those commercials, in part, people have a more enlightened view.

Nancy Young wrote:
> jmcquown wrote:
>
>> The side effects are often worse than the condition they're
>> prescribed for.
>
> It's true. Seems there is a pill for everything, but take them then you
> have a whole new set of problems (of course, there is a pill
> for those, too, each with their own problems).


My intestines react badly to some medications, like aspirin,
anti-imflammatory drugs and strong antibiotics. I was prescribed
Naproxin for tendonitis and it made my guts so weird that I preferred to
tolerate the pain from the ailment than the gastric problems from the
medication.