• VerilyFemme@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    For as many foolish things Kennedy has talked about wanting to institute, a drug ad ban is not one of them. Kinda awesome, actually.

    • Ech@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      Not exactly worth the damage he’s gonna do, though.

          • ArbiterXero@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            5 months ago

            No no, I understand that vaccines are important, you misunderstand my statement.

            “If we get rid of rfk’s vaccine bullshit”

            • Laurel Raven@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              5 months ago

              I’ll still be in a labor camp for the crime of having ADHD, but sure, take away his stance on vaccines and it’ll all be good

              (sorry for being snippy, just pointing out that the vaccine bullshit is just one of the layers of awful he wants to implement, and the drug ad ban is one of the few not horrible things I’ve heard from him)

              • ArbiterXero@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                5 months ago

                You’re being overly sensitive here, I gave you the win already.

                And no you can’t blame your ADHD for the sensitivity, I have it too.

                Chill my guy. I’m no rfk supporter, nor maga enthusiast.

                • Laurel Raven@lemmy.zip
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  What the hell are you talking about, gave me the win? What does that even mean? That was the only time I’ve ever replied to you.

                  Whether you meant to or not, you sounded like you were saying the main problem with him was the vaccines, without that he’s not that bad; I was pointing out that he’s promised a lot more bad things than that. I wasn’t even mad or upset or being overly sensitive about it (prickly, maybe, at least in presentation).

                  I didn’t even accuse you of being an RFK or maga supporter.

                  And now you’re doing the whole dismissive “don’t be so sensitive” bullshit. Just… Don’t do that.

    • takeda@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      He would be fired by trump before this would happen. The reason it is still allowed is because of interest money and this administration is all about money. The only way I would see such ban happening would be banning those ads on TV while enabling them on social media.

      • DankOfAmerica@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        Maybe the play is that he threatens to ban them until drug companies talk to him at a dinner and discuss much needed financial support for this administration’s projects.

        • takeda@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 months ago

          That’s how trump works, so it is possible that this is the idea.

  • WhatSay@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    He just wants to get rid of the entire healthcare system.

    It seems like the combination of project 2025 and RFK has the goal of making the masses sick and weak, so every minority can be targeted and replaced by evangelical over breeders.

    So, a modern spin on white eugenics.

  • SelfProgrammed@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    Remember, this would probably include flu/COVID vaccines at CVS just as much as restless leg syndrome pills. Just because the words “ban drug ads” sound like a good thing doesn’t mean the implementation is acceptable. Don’t throw the baby out with the bath water.

  • wheeldawg@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    Can medicine finally stop getting jingles?

    Fuck you (drug you all wanna mention but I won’t give them the exposure here) and your randomly changing cast of dancers and main singer.

    No more big story to tell got you.

    So RFK2 with this and Trump trying to end DST.

    If they can stay on the fringe of everything like that then maaaaybe it won’t be so bad? But they can’t.

    • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      The fact that these pharmaceutical companies can afford to license the songs that they’re riffing off of makes you wonder how many of your dollars are going to the actual production of the drugs you need to survive, and how many of those dollars are going into marketing

      • wheeldawg@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        Every medical choice you make should be made between you and your doctor(s).

        None should ever be made based on commercials. Ever.

    • skuzz@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      Not defending the guy, to be clear, but.

      That’s actually not how advertising works. Unless you live in a bubble in the US, you’re seeing drug ads at the tire shop, airport, restaurant, gas station, billboards, everywhere.

      Advertising is more about subconscious placement of things than active watching. Very few people sit down with a bowl of popcorn to watch 30 commercials for pleasure. You don’t even realize it got you, and may never.

      Futurama did a good sketch on the concept with “lightspeed briefs” where they were advertising in Fry’s dreams. Principle has always been the same.

      These ads used to be illegal, until the FDA in 1997 made it legal, David A. Kessler, who’s appointment continued by President Bill Clinton at the time made them legal. This same FDA actually did good things like nutrition facts labels, so it wasn’t all terrible. They alleged that advertising drugs would help inform the public, although in reality, it is a terrible mechanism to broadcast that type of information as marketing to an uninformed public and it should have never been allowed.

      • spireghost@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        Also not to mention, it influences your friends or family and the people you interact with. Unless you’re an antisocial hermit, you’re going to be affected one way or another

      • Futurama did a good sketch on the concept with “lightspeed briefs” where they were advertising in Fry’s dreams. Principle has always been the same.

        I feel obligated to post the transcript for this reference.

        Leela: Didn’t you have ad’s in the 20th century?

        Fry: Well sure, but not in our dreams. Only on TV and radio. And in magazines. And movies. And at ball games and on buses and milk cartons and t-shirts and written on the sky! But not in dreams. No siree!

  • Snapz@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    Read what a lot of you are saying in this thread about “rare W” and the like and realize this poignant saying…

    “You can’t only piss in one PART of the pool”

    You won’t get just the one thing you want from RFK, you’ll get it all - Stop taking the bait, dipshits. This is the candy he’s trying to give you while sliding down your pants with the other hand and slathering coconut oil on your b-hole.

    • flying_sheep@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      Trump won, so the US will get a pissed pool no matter what.

      To say “rare w” isn’t to deny that, it’s acknowledging that even though the pool is absolutely disguising with 80% piss, at least that’ll help some people with skin conditions.

      • Sylvartas@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        Yep that’s basically it. “Rare W” is not an endorsement, it’s pretty much the opposite : recognizing that an otherwise terrible person/organization did something good or made a good point for once.

      • Snapz@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        I get the general idea, but that’s not the point - you need to always deliver the sugar with the sour around these fucking people. Their tactic is repeating a lie constantly. When you’re constantly just saying, “I actually love this” and nothing else, you’re doing work for the bad guys.

        You can’t show just the outside beauty shot of the cupcake, you always have to cut it open to show clearly that the center is stuffed with warm, wet dog shit

  • Noxy@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    Fuck him and his insane and dangerous suggestions about medical stuff.

    But “ask your doctor about X” ads where X is a prescription-only drug should definitely be banned. Why the fuck would I ask my doctor about a medication if they haven’t already suggested it to me?

    • Infynis@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      Unfortunately, because it might be the only way to learn about an alternative treatment that wasn’t advertised to your doctor. If a law like this is put into place, it would have to be accompanied by greatly strengthened regulations on pharmaceutical reps too

      • Ricky Rigatoni@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        I can imagine that there are many people with lesser known diseases who only got tested for them because they saw a commercial for a drug for it and thought “hey that sounds exactly like me!”

        Buuuuuut these cases would be much better served by a campaign to make knowledge of diseases more readily available through dr office pamphlets, posters, PSAs, etc than commercials by for-profit prescription drug lords.

      • AlligatorBlizzard@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        Unfortunately, because it might be the only way to learn about an alternative treatment that wasn’t advertised to your doctor.

        This was almost exactly my situation and I’m still in favor of banning pharmaceutical advertising to the public because those same ads that drastically improved my life have harmed millions of others.

        I’m a transgender man, with a moderate needle phobia. I transitioned over a decade ago, and back then testosterone gel was basically never used for transition (the cost was significantly higher and insurance coverage was almost non-existent back then - I did have insurance coverage though) and there was misinformation around it in the trans community in the rare instance gel was discussed - but the only reason I or pretty much anyone else knew it was an option was the obscene deluge of ads for it. I asked my doctor about it and she figured out the dosing for me. It’s been a fantastic choice for me for a lot of reasons beyond just the needle phobia issues.

        But testosterone replacement therapy, and Androgel specifically, is a case study in exactly why you don’t want this kind of widespread direct to consumer marketing. Androgel basically created a market for their drug through this marketing. Men in their 60s complained about not feeling like they were in their 20s anymore (without any other negative symptoms of low T) and demanded a medication that could have increased their risk of cardiovascular issues and forced them onto the medication permanently, and they didn’t even feel 20 again because they’re not 20 anymore.

      • Riskable@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        If a treatment relies on advertising then it probably isn’t very effective. In fact, there’s boatloads of treatments that get approved by the FDA because they meet the minimum standard of “not going to kill someone right away and some folks showed a minor improvement.” It doesn’t mean they’re any good or worth trying just because you heard about them in an ad.

        Not only that but doctors know about all the treatments for the things they specialize in. You think they’re living under a rock‽ They know about that treatment X that’s being advertised everywhere but they also know that it didn’t show an efficacy at all at treating your specific condition(s) or they’ll know that the risk it carries outweighs the potential benefits.

        Doctors know 10,000 times more than you (or health insurers!) do about what’s medically necessary and/or effective. If a patient suggests a treatment don’t be surprised if the doctor’s eyes roll. “Here we go again.”

        Ads for prescription medications are a huge waste of money and they also waste doctors time explaining why they’re not a good idea for all the zillions of patients that “ask their doctor” about them.

        • Areyouseriousdotard@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 months ago

          It’s really a pain in the ass. People wanting to use stuff just because they saw it on tv. I’m a hospice nurse. Those old people are bombarded with ads and scams.

  • Snapz@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    Ooh, anything else about him worth mentioning?

    “Man wants to spend time socializing with children and giving them gifts” is an odd lead in for “unapologetic child molester stalks local park”