To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
The essence of lying is in deception, not in words.
- John Ruskin, Modern Painters
Plus AfASSa change, plus c'est la mAfAame chose -the news about the newest cholesterol lowering drugs and disclosure of the fact that there had been non-disclosure. It was reminiscent of the cigarette ads of many years ago.
The essence of lying is in deception, not in words.
- John Ruskin, Modern Painters
Plus AfASSa change, plus c'est la mAfAame chose -the news about the newest cholesterol lowering drugs and disclosure of the fact that there had been non-disclosure. It was reminiscent of the cigarette ads of many years ago.
An ad for Philip Morris that appeared in the May 22, 1943 Saturday Evening Post was full of great news about Philip Morris cigarettes, even though by then their creator knew they were killing their friends and devotees. The ad's headline in large letters cheerfully inquired: "Smoking Less- or Smoking More*?" and then * referred one to a small note that proudly proclaimed: "Gov't Figure show all-time peak in smoking". That was followed by the statement that "You're safer smoking PHILIP MORRIS!" It then went on to proudly state that those cigarettes were "Scientifically Proved less irritating for the nose and throat."
Having gotten through the hype, the ad continues in a more sober vein stating that: "Reported by eminent doctors-in medical journals. Their own findings that when smokers changed to Philip Morris 'every case of irritation of the nose or throat-due to smoking-either cleared up completely, or definitely improved!'" The additional good news imparted by the ad was that the subject of the tests that proved the beneficial effects of smoking were "actual men and women" as distinguished from "laboratory analysis" thus demonstrating conclusively that Philip Morris cigarettes were "far less irritating to your nose and throat." The only caveat to the obviously unmitigated benefits of switching to Philip Morris was the equivalent to today's warning that they might kill you. It stated: "NOTE we do not claim curative power for Philip Morris. But, man! What solid proof they're better . . . . . safer. . . to smoke." There's no indication what text was omitted from the ellipses.
It was all brought to mind when reading the full-page ads by Merck/Schering-Plough Pharmaceuticals trumpeting the virtues of Zetia and Vytorin, the latter being a combination of Zetia and Zocor, a statin. The drug companies conducted a test called "Enhance" that ended almost two years ago. They forgot to disclose the results of the test until January 14, 2008. Among the results was the fact that Zetia failed to slow the accumulation of fatty plaque in the arteries and might have contributed to its formation. The tests also disclosed there might be adverse effects on the liver when Zetia was used in combination with statins, the drugs that lower cholesterol.
Dr. Harlan N. Krumholz, a Yale cardiologist faulted the drug companies' failure to disclose the results of the study when they became available. Commenting to the New York Times he said: "People may have been on this drug without the ability to know that there was additional data that may have thrown into question its effectiveness. That's extremely unfortunate, and that's an understatement." Dr. Steven E. Nissen, the chairman of cardiology at the Cleveland Clinic, described the results of the tests as "shocking" and went on to say that the test results were "as bad a result for the drug as anybody could have feared."
It was not only a bad result for patients and the drugs. It was also a bad result for stockholders in the two companies since the two drugs generated $5 billion in sales in 2007. Although the tests only raised the possibility of damage to the liver and threw into doubt whether or not those taking the drugs lowered their risk of heart attack, there was one thing the tests did lower-the companies' profits from sales of the drugs. Following disclosure of the report, the stock's price dropped and sales of the drugs will certainly follow suit. Fortunately for stockholders, the two drug companies are not sitting quietly by. They have begun an advertising campaign to counter the bad results of the study believing, as all drug companies do, in the magical power of advertising.
In full-page ads in major newspapers around the country they describe the study as one study that has "generated a lot of confusion," although apparently not in the minds of the doctors quoted above. The ad states that the "American College of Cardiology and the American Heart Association agree that lowering bad cholesterol is important," conveniently overlooking the fact that while the drug lowered bad cholesterol it increased the growth of fatty plaque in the arteries when compared with patients taking Zocor alone. The rest of the ad differed from the cigarette ad in one important respect. Less than half the ad extolled the virtues of the drugs. The remainder described in excruciating detail all the terrible things that might happen to those taking the drug as is the requirement in drug advertisements.
The ad won't help those who have taken the medicine. They can only hope the medicine hasn't harmed them. Whether it helps the stockholders to whom non-disclosure of the test results suggests the companies have greater loyalty than to their customers, only time will tell.
Christopher Brauchli-brauchli.56@post.harvard.edu
For his political commentary https://humanraceandothersports.com
Common Dreams is powered by optimists who believe in the power of informed and engaged citizens to ignite and enact change to make the world a better place. We're hundreds of thousands strong, but every single supporter makes the difference. Your contribution supports this bold media model—free, independent, and dedicated to reporting the facts every day. Stand with us in the fight for economic equality, social justice, human rights, and a more sustainable future. As a people-powered nonprofit news outlet, we cover the issues the corporate media never will. Join with us today! |
The essence of lying is in deception, not in words.
- John Ruskin, Modern Painters
Plus AfASSa change, plus c'est la mAfAame chose -the news about the newest cholesterol lowering drugs and disclosure of the fact that there had been non-disclosure. It was reminiscent of the cigarette ads of many years ago.
An ad for Philip Morris that appeared in the May 22, 1943 Saturday Evening Post was full of great news about Philip Morris cigarettes, even though by then their creator knew they were killing their friends and devotees. The ad's headline in large letters cheerfully inquired: "Smoking Less- or Smoking More*?" and then * referred one to a small note that proudly proclaimed: "Gov't Figure show all-time peak in smoking". That was followed by the statement that "You're safer smoking PHILIP MORRIS!" It then went on to proudly state that those cigarettes were "Scientifically Proved less irritating for the nose and throat."
Having gotten through the hype, the ad continues in a more sober vein stating that: "Reported by eminent doctors-in medical journals. Their own findings that when smokers changed to Philip Morris 'every case of irritation of the nose or throat-due to smoking-either cleared up completely, or definitely improved!'" The additional good news imparted by the ad was that the subject of the tests that proved the beneficial effects of smoking were "actual men and women" as distinguished from "laboratory analysis" thus demonstrating conclusively that Philip Morris cigarettes were "far less irritating to your nose and throat." The only caveat to the obviously unmitigated benefits of switching to Philip Morris was the equivalent to today's warning that they might kill you. It stated: "NOTE we do not claim curative power for Philip Morris. But, man! What solid proof they're better . . . . . safer. . . to smoke." There's no indication what text was omitted from the ellipses.
It was all brought to mind when reading the full-page ads by Merck/Schering-Plough Pharmaceuticals trumpeting the virtues of Zetia and Vytorin, the latter being a combination of Zetia and Zocor, a statin. The drug companies conducted a test called "Enhance" that ended almost two years ago. They forgot to disclose the results of the test until January 14, 2008. Among the results was the fact that Zetia failed to slow the accumulation of fatty plaque in the arteries and might have contributed to its formation. The tests also disclosed there might be adverse effects on the liver when Zetia was used in combination with statins, the drugs that lower cholesterol.
Dr. Harlan N. Krumholz, a Yale cardiologist faulted the drug companies' failure to disclose the results of the study when they became available. Commenting to the New York Times he said: "People may have been on this drug without the ability to know that there was additional data that may have thrown into question its effectiveness. That's extremely unfortunate, and that's an understatement." Dr. Steven E. Nissen, the chairman of cardiology at the Cleveland Clinic, described the results of the tests as "shocking" and went on to say that the test results were "as bad a result for the drug as anybody could have feared."
It was not only a bad result for patients and the drugs. It was also a bad result for stockholders in the two companies since the two drugs generated $5 billion in sales in 2007. Although the tests only raised the possibility of damage to the liver and threw into doubt whether or not those taking the drugs lowered their risk of heart attack, there was one thing the tests did lower-the companies' profits from sales of the drugs. Following disclosure of the report, the stock's price dropped and sales of the drugs will certainly follow suit. Fortunately for stockholders, the two drug companies are not sitting quietly by. They have begun an advertising campaign to counter the bad results of the study believing, as all drug companies do, in the magical power of advertising.
In full-page ads in major newspapers around the country they describe the study as one study that has "generated a lot of confusion," although apparently not in the minds of the doctors quoted above. The ad states that the "American College of Cardiology and the American Heart Association agree that lowering bad cholesterol is important," conveniently overlooking the fact that while the drug lowered bad cholesterol it increased the growth of fatty plaque in the arteries when compared with patients taking Zocor alone. The rest of the ad differed from the cigarette ad in one important respect. Less than half the ad extolled the virtues of the drugs. The remainder described in excruciating detail all the terrible things that might happen to those taking the drug as is the requirement in drug advertisements.
The ad won't help those who have taken the medicine. They can only hope the medicine hasn't harmed them. Whether it helps the stockholders to whom non-disclosure of the test results suggests the companies have greater loyalty than to their customers, only time will tell.
Christopher Brauchli-brauchli.56@post.harvard.edu
For his political commentary https://humanraceandothersports.com
The essence of lying is in deception, not in words.
- John Ruskin, Modern Painters
Plus AfASSa change, plus c'est la mAfAame chose -the news about the newest cholesterol lowering drugs and disclosure of the fact that there had been non-disclosure. It was reminiscent of the cigarette ads of many years ago.
An ad for Philip Morris that appeared in the May 22, 1943 Saturday Evening Post was full of great news about Philip Morris cigarettes, even though by then their creator knew they were killing their friends and devotees. The ad's headline in large letters cheerfully inquired: "Smoking Less- or Smoking More*?" and then * referred one to a small note that proudly proclaimed: "Gov't Figure show all-time peak in smoking". That was followed by the statement that "You're safer smoking PHILIP MORRIS!" It then went on to proudly state that those cigarettes were "Scientifically Proved less irritating for the nose and throat."
Having gotten through the hype, the ad continues in a more sober vein stating that: "Reported by eminent doctors-in medical journals. Their own findings that when smokers changed to Philip Morris 'every case of irritation of the nose or throat-due to smoking-either cleared up completely, or definitely improved!'" The additional good news imparted by the ad was that the subject of the tests that proved the beneficial effects of smoking were "actual men and women" as distinguished from "laboratory analysis" thus demonstrating conclusively that Philip Morris cigarettes were "far less irritating to your nose and throat." The only caveat to the obviously unmitigated benefits of switching to Philip Morris was the equivalent to today's warning that they might kill you. It stated: "NOTE we do not claim curative power for Philip Morris. But, man! What solid proof they're better . . . . . safer. . . to smoke." There's no indication what text was omitted from the ellipses.
It was all brought to mind when reading the full-page ads by Merck/Schering-Plough Pharmaceuticals trumpeting the virtues of Zetia and Vytorin, the latter being a combination of Zetia and Zocor, a statin. The drug companies conducted a test called "Enhance" that ended almost two years ago. They forgot to disclose the results of the test until January 14, 2008. Among the results was the fact that Zetia failed to slow the accumulation of fatty plaque in the arteries and might have contributed to its formation. The tests also disclosed there might be adverse effects on the liver when Zetia was used in combination with statins, the drugs that lower cholesterol.
Dr. Harlan N. Krumholz, a Yale cardiologist faulted the drug companies' failure to disclose the results of the study when they became available. Commenting to the New York Times he said: "People may have been on this drug without the ability to know that there was additional data that may have thrown into question its effectiveness. That's extremely unfortunate, and that's an understatement." Dr. Steven E. Nissen, the chairman of cardiology at the Cleveland Clinic, described the results of the tests as "shocking" and went on to say that the test results were "as bad a result for the drug as anybody could have feared."
It was not only a bad result for patients and the drugs. It was also a bad result for stockholders in the two companies since the two drugs generated $5 billion in sales in 2007. Although the tests only raised the possibility of damage to the liver and threw into doubt whether or not those taking the drugs lowered their risk of heart attack, there was one thing the tests did lower-the companies' profits from sales of the drugs. Following disclosure of the report, the stock's price dropped and sales of the drugs will certainly follow suit. Fortunately for stockholders, the two drug companies are not sitting quietly by. They have begun an advertising campaign to counter the bad results of the study believing, as all drug companies do, in the magical power of advertising.
In full-page ads in major newspapers around the country they describe the study as one study that has "generated a lot of confusion," although apparently not in the minds of the doctors quoted above. The ad states that the "American College of Cardiology and the American Heart Association agree that lowering bad cholesterol is important," conveniently overlooking the fact that while the drug lowered bad cholesterol it increased the growth of fatty plaque in the arteries when compared with patients taking Zocor alone. The rest of the ad differed from the cigarette ad in one important respect. Less than half the ad extolled the virtues of the drugs. The remainder described in excruciating detail all the terrible things that might happen to those taking the drug as is the requirement in drug advertisements.
The ad won't help those who have taken the medicine. They can only hope the medicine hasn't harmed them. Whether it helps the stockholders to whom non-disclosure of the test results suggests the companies have greater loyalty than to their customers, only time will tell.
Christopher Brauchli-brauchli.56@post.harvard.edu
For his political commentary https://humanraceandothersports.com