|2005N-0354||Consumer-Directed Promotion of Regulated Medical Products; Part 15 Public Hearing|
|FDA Comment Number :||EC87|
|Submitter :||Dr. John Kelly||Date & Time:||12/07/2005 06:12:12|
|Organization :||Ann Arbor Integrative Medicine|
|Category :||Health Professional|
| Since 1997 the government under corporate leadership began to allow DTC advertising and since then the powerful effects of TV and printed marketing have worked the idea that for any symptom there is a drug, and all you must do is find a way to get it. I could refer you to the New York Times, November 16, 2005 Being a Patient Young, Assured and Playing Pharmacist to Friends
By AMY HARMON. I've seen this in my practice with people coming in saying, "I don't want to waste your time. I'm just here to get (insert drug name here)." For a government that says it doesn't want anybody on drugs, it would seem that applies only if there isn't a profit to made from it. Making a speech at work? Social anxiety disorder! Paxil! There's a pharmaceutical drug for any occasion, and our children are being brought up thinking that they can alter any day's mood with a pill. Who wants to feel anything remotely bad? Is it any wonder that the so-called War on Drugs is a joke? In some cases, medication can make the difference between life and a living death, but in college students are taking Adderall for exams, and getting the good numbers which assure their future. It's being sold just for that purpose, and students come to my practice wanting it. I must be suspicious, and we are immediately at crossed purposes, set against one another. I also find this when the insurance won't cover a medication, but that's another letter for another time. But the same is true with any pain medication when the patient comes with that in mind. It would be so much simpler just to have vending machines on the streets, in the bars and student libraries. Think of the profits. The FDA is being paid by charging the pharmaceutical companies for evaluating their medication. The entity which pays your salary is your boss, and there have been a number of investigative reports surrounding that theme. It depends on whether you want P.R. and spin, or anything resembling the truth as the bottom line. Why just control damage to the FDA's image, when you have a chance to actually do something good? Can we even recognize truth anymore? Is it in the eye of the beholder, or the politics of the job? If we all take serotonin reuptake inhibitors, does anything matter?