[Top] [All Lists]

[e-drug] Non-Industry promotional claims (3)

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 
their promotion! 

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
Monash University
Email: kenneth.harvey@monash.edu 
"Ken Harvey" <k.harvey@medreach.com.au>
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • [e-drug] Non-Industry promotional claims (3), Ken Harvey <=