When Advertizing Kills

[Guest guest]

When Advertizing Kills

Ask your doctor if you blowing up your *#*%$! TV is right for you!

 

 

Advertising has been called “legalized lying†by both H.G. Wells and Mark

Twain.

from: _http://www.mnwelldir.org:80/nw_current.htm_

(http://www.mnwelldir.org/nw_current.htm)

Vilhjalmur Stefansson asks, “What is the difference between unethical and

ethical advertising? Unethical advertising uses falsehoods to deceive the

public; ethical advertising uses truth to deceive the public.â€

Legalized lying has had a colorful history in America, and the most colorful

of all products ever advertized are drugs, nostrums, and patent medicines, or

as we lovingly know them today: Pharmaceuticals.

Prior to the 20th Century, before radio and television advertising, patent

medicines were advertised in newspapers, magazines, in catalogs (such as

Sears), on billboards, on posters in stores, on shelves of stores, in hand

outs,

and hawked on the streets (as seen in many popular westerns).

These medicines promised fabulous cures for every ailment: scrofula, kidney

disease, balding and falling hair, dyspepsia, worms, catarrh, and nerve

disorders. These were times in which there was little access to physicians or

good

health information, and prescription medicines were much more expensive than

any of these that were sold over the counter or off the wagon.

“The only reason I made a commercial for American Express was to pay for my

American Express bill.â€

Peter Ustinov

Most contained a _lot of alcohol_

(http://www.pbs.org/now/popups/photo1rx.html) , and many were mixed with

opiates, the wonder drug of the 19th century.

Laudanum was a favorite of the time. An article out of the 1972 Penthouse

called “Grandma Was a Junkie†describes the machinations of the author’s

grandmother around the turn of the century in her quest to satisfy her

addiction to

laudanum. Local pharmacies knew she was addicted and refused to supply her

with it, so she was forced to go to different sections of the town to get her

fix.

Many of these favorites of yesteryear are illegal today or prescribed

minimally:

* Chloral hydrate — a sedative and hypnotic drug, often slipped into

an alcoholic drink to make a “Mickey Finnâ€

* Paregoric — a camphorated tincture of opium

* Heroin — another opiate marketed from 1898 to 1910 as a “non

additive†cough medicine for children. Bayer marketed heroin as a cure for

morphine

addiction.

* Codeine — first isolated in 1830, an opiate that was marketed in

cold syrups right up till recently, and are still mixed with acetaminophen as a

pain killer, even though studies show that codeine is practically worthless.

* Morphine — first isolated in 1804 in Germany, its popularity never

caught on till the invention of the hypodermic needle in 1853. It was used as

a cure for opium and alcohol addiction until we figured out that it was much

more addictive than both of them. Morphine is carried by soldiers on

maneuvers in an “autoinjector.â€

* Laudanum — an alcoholic tincture of opium that is still available by

prescription for extreme diarrhea that hasn’t responded to therapy. Famous

fans of Laudanum are John Keats, Lewis Carroll, Charles Dickens, Edgar Allan

Poe, Mary Todd Lincoln, Meriwether Lewis, and George Washington.

Many medicines contained dangerous chemicals. We've written about the

Rockefellers discovering oil; how they quickly bottled it and marketed it as a

_cancer cure_

(file:///C:/Program%20Files/Common%20Files/Microsoft%20Shared/Stationery/docs/hi\

story/quackery.htm#Rockefeller) .

It wasn’t until a series of articles published in Collier’s Weekly called

“

The Great American Fraud†that the American public got a wakeup call to what

they’d been putting in their bodies. Congress was pressed into action and,

viola, out popped the Pure Food and Drug Act of 1906.

“It is a most extraordinary thing, but I never read a patent medicine

advertisement without being impelled to the conclusion that I am suffering from

the

particular disease therein dealt with in its most virulent form.†Jerome K

Jerome

Today the FTC, Federal Trade Commission handles advertising while the FDA

handles specifically food, supplement, herbal, and drug advertizing. The FTC

will oftentimes get into the picture too for these listed products.

There has been legislation in recent years, calling for side effects to be

listed for print, radio, and television advertising, but still consumer groups

fight on because these billion dollar drug companies still get away with…

well… murder.

We’ve updated our article on Chronic Therapy adding Anthocyanins LINK which

are water-soluble flavonoids found in fruits and vegetables that inhibit the

inflammatory COX 1 and 2 enzymes. Cherries (and chokecherries) are among the

most potent fruits in this category.

Even though there are literally hundreds of studies that show cherries

(especially the tart ones) to help fight the inflammation of arthritis, the FDA

has come down hard on the cherry industry not allowing them to advertize this

feature.

On the OTHER hand, Honey/Nut Cheerios and other breakfast cereals with way

too much sugar (the Honey/Nut Cheerios contains three types of sugar) and way

too many carbs get to advertise heavily how heart healthy they are. Because

studies show that eating oat fiber can lower cholesterol levels, General Mills

has launched huge promotional campaigns that make ridiculously outrageous

health claims.

Legal Lie: You need a car that is fun to drive, and that car is shown on the

open road, all alone, buzzing along, taking curves, speeding up on the

straightaways.

The Reality: You commute to work in traffic, you commute home in traffic,

and whenever you get out on the open road, there’s a truck in front of you

that

is impossible to pass on that beautiful, scenic, curvy road.

Since when do oats, processed till there is hardly anything left resembling

an oats, coated in sugar, with artificial flavors and artificial colors get

to advertise that they’ll lower your cholesterol better than aged garlic.

And if aged garlic (or organic whole foods) attempted to advertise health

benefits, FDA storm troopers would be called out while their expensive

attorneys piled up lists of charges.

This Just In:

Why the FDA doesn't want you to know about this painkiller

Did you know that eating 20 cherries has the same anti-inflammatory effect

as popping aspirin or a cox-2 inhibiting drug? If not, you can blame the FDA.

 

Several years ago, U.S. Department of Agriculture studies proved that

cherries have powerful anti-inflammatory properties. When the cherry growers

used

the studies to promote their fruit, the FDA went on a witch hunt and told them

to stop. The FDA ruled that the cherry growers could not use the evidence to

make these claims.

 

Why? Because the FDA requires food manufacturers and growers to satisfy the

agency's unobtainable standard of proof before promoting health claims of

their products. However, the cost is so prohibitive to do so that most

companies

and organizations simply can't meet the standard.

 

But guess who can? The drug companies. The current FDA rules give the drug

companies an unfair advantage in the marketplace. As a result, the cherry

growers can't tell you about the anti-inflammatory properties of their cherries.

But the drug makers can make claims about their drugs all day long - even

though they both have the same abilities. And guess which one has killed over

20,000 people? It isn't the cherries, but the FDA isn't concerned about that.

 

This unhindered access to the FDA has given the drug companies tremendous

power. So much, in fact, that no one is willing to stand up to them - until

now.

 

Congressman, medical doctor, and presidential candidate Ron Paul recently

said, " enough is enough " and is standing up to the Big Pharma bullies who run

the FDA. Dr. Paul has introduced H.R. 2117 (the Health Freedom Protection Act)

into the House. It will effectively stop the FDA from censoring truthful

claims about the health benefits of dietary supplements and other foods.

 

The goal of H.R. 2117 is to put an end to the federal bureaucrats' meddling

with your right to choose healthy alternatives over harmful and deadly drugs.

Dr. Paul believes the FDA should not prevent Americans from learning about

simple ways to improve their health.

 

Dr. Paul's bill will put the burden of proof where it belongs, on the

FDA/FTC when it comes to determining if an ad is false or misleading. This

makes

sense, as you're always innocent until proven guilty in this country. But the

FDA considers you guilty until you can bribe your way into innocence.

 

Big Pharma has the FDA firmly in pocket. Censoring vital information, as it

did with the cherry growers, is their only way to stay in business! Perhaps

bill H.R. 2117 can get enough traction to stick if enough of us stand firmly

behind it. I urge you to contact your elected officials to get HR 2117 moving.

It is currently stuck in committee and it needs your help. The easiest way

to do that is to visit the website _www.house.gov/writerep/_

(http://link.ixs1.net/s/lt?id=456071 & si=1125544349 & pc=i2002 & ei=h135302) . Once

you're at the

site, simply follow the instructions on the screen and you can send your

representatives a note on this very important bill. Please do so today! Your

health

depends on it.

 

Yours for better health and medical freedom,

Robert Jay Rowen, MD

 

Ref: LewRockwell.com May 16, 2007.

Get Dr Rowen's newsletter at: _http://www.secondopinionnewsletter.com_

(http://www.secondopinionnewsletter.com/)

Conclusion? The FDA allows blatant false advertising for huge corporations

but disallows this same advertising for small companies making healthy food

and supplements.

Will Congress step in and investigate? Of course!

False and misleading advertising irks our congress. Just recently, Congress

formed a committee to investigate misleading advertising in the drug

industry. Horray for the little guy!

Well, not really. Congress wanted to know if Dr Robert Jarvik (a medical

doctor who is not licensed to practice medicine and does not specialize in

cardiology, but did invent an artificial heart) actually knows how to row a

boat.

Apparently the ad agency hired a stunt double for the sculling scenes. Dr

Jarvik is not an outdoorsman. Boy did he piss off Congress.

Sadly, congress forgot to investigate if Lipitor actually saves lives (no,

it does not significantly lowered heart attack rates) or if it does more

damage to the human body (every cell in your body needs cholesterol) by

stopping

the body’s production of CoQ10 (which the heart DOES need). The list of side

effects is remarkable.

Congress did NOT investigate if cholesterol actually causes heart disease.

Congress did not discover that your overall cholesterol numbers have no

connection to your chances of heart attack or stroke, but that recent studies

have shown conclusively that your chances of having a heart attack or stroke

decrease as the ratio of HDL to LDL goes up. The more HDL (good cholesterol),

the better your chances of a heart disease free life.

Congress did not investigate that statin drugs can cause heart failure,

memory problems, and cancers.

Congress did not investigate that cholesterol lowering drugs lower both good

and bad cholesterol.

Congress did not investigate that there is no such thing as bad cholesterol.

Congress did not discover that the so called bad cholesterol’s job is to

patch arteries that have injuries from cardiovascular disease. Nor did they

discover that good cholesterol should be called Preventive Cholesterol while

so-called bad cholesterol should be called Reparative Cholesterol (it’s job

is

to repair a problem caused by heart disease; it does not cause heart

disease).

Congress investigated Dr Robert Jarvik’s ability to row a boat.

The stunt double wrote an article that was subtitled: “My Brief Career as a

Drug Pusher.†Jarvik contracted to fake, or make, these commercials for over

a million dollars.

With the pharm industry under close scrutiny to never again use a stunt

double when advertising questionable drugs, Merck/Shering pulled their latest

television advertising on Zetia and Vytorin. Some advertising industry sources

were shocked because on careful examination of their ads, they found that no

stunt doubles were used.

Apparently, Zetia and Vytorin ads were dropped BECASE THEY WILL KILL YOU.

Oh?

The print ads continued a bit longer, but are now pulled. Zetia will lower

your cholesterol, but does nothing to stop it from gathering on your arteries.

In fact, it seemed to increase the amount of cholesterol found on your

arteries, thus, it can be concluded that Zetia caused heart disease.

Zetia, however, did not kill as many people as Vioxx. Vioxx is now not

allowed to advertise, but doctors can still prescribe it.

Vioxx is no longer advertised for the same reason that no prescription drug

should be advertised: patients will ask for it and it will be over

prescribed.

Vioxx had been created to treat inflammation in people at risk for

gastro-intestinal issues while using things like aspirin. You would think that

it

would have been prescribed to only patients with a high risk of GI problems.

However, it is estimated that nearly 90% of of Vioxx users did not need the

drug.

Just over 10% of those patients prescribed Vioxx needed the drug. Why were

so many people over prescribed this drug?

Vioxx was heavily advertised. Heavy advertising means hefty sales. Patients

go to their doctors and ask for Vioxx. Doctors prescribe Vioxx because of

perks from drug companies for prescribing their drugs. Suddenly we have nearly

half a million people on Vioxx, only 10 - 12% actually need it and a few years

later we find that 139,000 people have been injured by Vioxx.

_http://www.msnbc.msn.com:80/id/6782229/_ (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6782229/)

and over

60,000 dead from heart attacks.

To end this discussion, I’d like to quote one of my favorite PBS programs

that is no longer on the air, NOW:

It is hardly a secret that direct-to-consumer drug advertising is big

business. In December 2004 the New York Times reported that a recent study by

advertising revenue tracker TNS Media Intelligence/CMR found that prescription

medicine ads aired during ABC, CBS and NBC's nightly news accounted for nearly

29 percent, or $110 million, of all ad revenue from January through September

of 2004. Vioxx's makers had spent $78 million on direct-to-consumer ads last

year and other products have tallies just as high.

Call your representatives, ask them how much money s/he received from the

Pharmaceutical Industry, and then ask him/her if that amount of money would

affect whether s/he votes to outlaw prescription drug advertising. Over and

over

and over it has been demonstrated that television advertising of

prescription drugs leads to overprescribing these drugs. Here are a few free

numbers to

the DC offices (that we’ve checked out): 800-828-0498, 800-614-2803 and

877-851-6437. Just ask for your representative’s office.

Legal Lie: Aspirin will protect you from a heart attack.

The Reality: Magnesium, garlic, vitamin C, and fish oils will protect you

from a heart attack. Aspirin will increase your chances of hemorrhagic stroke

some 40%.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Kinda like the cholesterol medications that now doctors are very

hesitant to prescribe.