E-DRUG: Non-Industry promotional claims (3)
Graham Dukes said: 'So far as I can see this sort of quackery is currently not
prevented by national drug advertising controls' while Foppe van Mil was
interested in the commercial strategies behind it.
Ironically, in Australia at least, some pharmaceutical companies who have
traditionally produced evidence-based prescription drugs have now bought up
smaller "complementary" medicine companies but they certainly have not improved
Clearly the motive for all who promote therapeutic products with claims that
lack evidence is to make money.
In Australia, companies producing "complementary" medicines get a much better
return by investing in celebrity product endorsement and marketing hype rather
than genuine research.
produced by the activist group 'The Checkout'.
These matters were the subject of a Sydney University Health-Law seminar held
earlier this year.
This seminar was held back-to-back with World Consumer Rights Day 2016 (March
15) and the National Consumer Congress (March 16). The latter was hosted by the
Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC). The 2016 Congress
discussed how to better protect and empower consumers in the lead up to the
review of the Australian Consumer Law.
Our seminar�s aim was to outline current concerns that consumer (and health
professional) organisations have with the advertising of therapeutic goods and
services and to explore ways in which the system(s) might be improved.
The material produced may be of interest,
Dr Ken Harvey
Adjunct Associate Professor
Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine
School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine
"Ken Harvey" <firstname.lastname@example.org>