The ad with the dude with the "horns" for Viagra is being pulled by the FDA. Since the FDA has allowed Prescription Drugs to be advertised directly to the public, the drug companies have gotten bolder and bolder and ignored more and more rules about how to advertise drugs that in the opinion of many, should only be suggested by a medical professional during a medical exam. One of the political aspects of Viagra is that most insurance companies will pay for Viagra and other drugs for "erectile dysfunction" but still refuse to pay for birth control for womyn. My insurance company will pay for up to 16 Viagra pills a month, yet refuses to pay for ANY form of birth control, and even limits the amount of maternity coverage subscribers get. (Coverage for Sage's birth was "denied" after she was born, because they claim, after paying for all my prenatal tests and visits and an "ultrasound of pregnant uterus" AND a visit to a high rish perinatologist, that they "were never informed that Mrs. Sugar (me) was pregnant." We are still fighting, four years later, for them to pay for her birth.) Getting a boner is a "medical neccesity" yet birth control, even with medical neccesity deemed by the doctor, and even paying for births is not, according to our insurance. Here is a transcript an article about the FDA and Viagra advert. FDA Orders Viagra to Pull 'Wild Thing' Ad Mon Nov 15, 5:41 PM ET U.S. National - AP By DIEDTRA HENDERSON, AP Science Writer WASHINGTON - The government ordered Pfizer Inc. to yank cheeky television ads that promised better sex for men taking Viagra because they failed to disclose known risks associated with the drug, according to a letter released on Monday. Reuters Photo "The TV ads omit the indication for the drug (namely, treatment of erectile dysfunction) and fail to provide information relating to the major side effects and contraindications of the drug, as required," Christine Hemler Smith, a Food and Drug Administration (news - web sites) regulatory review officer, informed Pfizer in a letter posted on the agency's Web site. "Remember that guy who used to be called 'Wild Thing?'" the ads say as a middle-aged couple shop, looking in the window of a lingerie store. "The guy who wanted to spend the entire honeymoon indoors?" Later, blue horns sprout from the frisky man's head with "He's back" written on his forehead. The horns morph into the letter "V" of Viagra. "The TV ads claim that Viagra will provide a return to a previous level of sexual desire and activity," Smith wrote to Robert B. Clark, a Pfizer vice president. "FDA (news - web sites) is not aware of substantial evidence or substantial clinical experience demonstrating this benefit for patients who take Viagra," Smith wrote. Pfizer has already removed the TV ad clip from its Web site, and is "in the process" of pulling the TV ads, said spokesman Daniel Watts. Pfizer also is drafting a formal reply to the FDA's letter, posted Monday. Viagra is among the company's top 10 best-selling drugs, behind such products as Lipitor (news - web sites), Zoloft and Celebrex. Viagra accounted for $1.87 billion in global sales last year, including $1.1 billion in sales to American men. It's not clear whether the agency's regulatory action extends beyond the 15- and 30-second television ads. Viagra's Web site, for instance, reinforces the ad campaign with a blue horned man under the headline "Get back to mischief." The FDA asked the company to cease "promotional materials" similar to the television ads it described in its letter, but did not include specifics. "We're going to look at everything we have," Watts said, to ensure the company complies with the FDA's request. Men who already have heart disease can risk further heart woes when they have sex, Smith's letter said. Viagra, approved to treat erectile dysfunction, should not be used by men with heart conditions whose doctors have warned them not to have sex. Also, patients taking drugs that contain nitrates have been warned not to take Viagra because of sudden, unsafe drops in blood pressure. The drug's label also warns of erections lasting longer than four hours, painful erections lasting longer than six hours, headache, flushed skin and vision problems. The FDA said Pfizer's television ads "misbrand" Viagra, and demanded the company immediately pull them. The agency is requiring a response to its letter by Nov. 24. Consumer advocate Sidney Wolfe said FDA enforcement against misleading advertising dropped from 157 actions in 1998 to just 23 last year. "If you are the industry, you cannot help but notice the FDA has largely stopped enforcing the laws and regulations on drug advertising," Wolfe said. "Therefore, you're almost encouraged to run misleading ads like this. By the time the FDA catches up with this kind of ad, it's likely millions of people, or more, have seen the ad."
I agree, prescription drugs are best decided upon by a doctor, not some dunce who watches too much TV.
Heh, I just remembered though, those zoloft commercials did help my mom understand my depression a little better . I think it actually helped her deal with it better too since they're such a darn happy way to look at depression lol. I still agree though, they NEVER should have started advertising prescription drugs on tv.
what i love is when you have the drugs that are like "cure arthritis pains...side effects are anal dripage, slight chance of stroke, headache, nausea and an inflamed pancreas. Cure one problem and create 500 others.
I agree, prescription drugs are best decided upon by a doctor, not some dunce who watches too much TV. Agreed, you have to see a doctor to get these, unless you go on the internet. But the "dunce" who doesnt know what is wrong with "the little guy" or how it can be corrected would be too embarresed to ask. (I would assume most men would be). If you take all the drug spots off, the feminine hygiene (douche) and underware ads, the food ads (causes obesity) and any other ad that would be harmful to children or the population in general all that would be left would be Old Mister Rodgers Neighborhood clips. The real issue is they (Pfizer ) should put the warnings on the ad. Its a valid product, most people who have used it (or have their partneruse it) swears by it. Its been out long enough and the warnings have been broadcasted that everyone who is in that group that might be interested in it would know of its side-affects. Like every one knows cigarettes cause instant death to those within 50 feet, but still the warning has to be on the label.... My-opinion
Yes, the reason the ad was pulled was that they neglected the warnings they were supposed to put on it, and INPLIED that Viagra will restore "desire" which is is NOT FDA approved to do. It is only FDA approved for "erectile dysfunction" and althought that sounds nitpicky, the rules should be followed. They pulled a birth control pill ad when it claimed to cure acne, because it wasn''t FDA approved to do so. Although and doctor can prescribe ANY drug for any indication he or she feels will work (called off lable presribing and completely legal) the advertising laws are different.
I guess it would have to do with the fact that erectile dysfunction is a legitimate medical problem. Birth control is a whole different issue. The only reason that you're comparing the two is because you want to turn this into a feminist issue because you're a sexist bigot.
I don't know how much choice you have as to what health insurance policy you have but not all insurers do that. Some in lieu of such complaints have dropped covereage of Viagra.
I have no problem with men who have real problems (like diabetes ect) getting this stuff, but it makes no sense to not also cover birth control. Our insurance (which is the only one we can have at my dh's work) doesn't care about "complaints." You need a letter from your doctor to have ADHD treated, but you can get a boner medicine with no problem. <snork!>
Calling erectile dysfunction a medical problem is ridiculous- and if they can do that they should call fertility in women a dysfunction too. doc, I don't want to have more kids, but these ovaries of mine won't quit well, young lady, you've got OFS, Overly Fertile Syndrome so let's prescribe you something. Drug companies should be all over that! If the drug companies wanted birth control pills covered by insurance to drive sales they'd lobby for it. I think they want women having more kids, so they can prescribe the kids stuff, and the mothers anti-depression stuff, and the father's anti-stress stuff. But then again, I'm cynical, wouldn't you guess? ;-) Beeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
Advertising for prescription drugs has historically been BANNED and should be again. In its place should be public service announcments regarding various illnesses and notice that "doctors may be able to prescribe drugs to treat this disorder." And nothing more. If that doesn't make having a limp penis "cool enough" to seek help for, so be it. The harm done by prescription advertising so far outweighs the benefits (especially to children and the mentally ill), it should not exist.
Oh don't get me wrong. I agree that its wrong and I too am not pleased with drug dealers advertising.
