The idea of drug companies encouraging MDs to dispense their products has worked well in the past. The free samples, educational material, in-house research (an oxymoron?), and various other inducements were effective during their time.
But in this age of patient empowerment, MDs seem to be moving down to second or third choice when it comes to influencing patients. What we see now are drug companies making deals with managed care organizations directly. Take away the choice, and you can better sell the drugs. This approach has its draw backs. What about those people who don't belong to HMOs?
But the drug companies have finally seen the light, and it's called direct marketing! Perhaps you've noticed the numerous advertisements for prescription drugs in popular magazines. With their vast resources, the drug companies are discovering that today's health care consumer is quite capable of reading an advertisement and asking for prescriptions drugs by name.
Who cares if the vast majority of health care consumers aren't going to be reading the ad's fine print disclaimers and morbidity/mortality warnings, or consulting the Physicians' Desk Reference for the precautions and adverse reactions of the drugs they're imbibing.
MDs are bending to the wishes of the "empowered" consumer, but empowerment can have its drawbacks. Without adequate information, such patients become easy prey. This is why the federal government has made such an issue over the advertising practices of cigarette companies. Even with the prominent warning labels on packs of cigarettes, many people are influenced by the advertising to smoke away.
Most everyone knows that smoking is a killer, yet people still smoke. Given this phenomenon, how can the public ever be expected to appreciate the lethal potential of drugs prescribed by their health care providers?
Now let's talk about real empowerment. It has long been known and understood by political advisors and marketing directors that the "highest court in the land is the court of public opinion." As major purchasers of advertising, the drug companies have a significant impact on the content of publications, radio programs, and television shows. Think not? Look back at the October 21, 1996 issue of Dynamic Chiropractic. It featured a front page article about issues of Time and Life magazines. The special issue of Time magazine (Fall, 1996), "Frontiers of Medicine," contained 27 full page advertisements. Drug companies paid for 23 of those; insurance companies paid for two; and one page was given gratis to the Ad Council. There was also an eight page insertion, "Health Tips and Resources Guide," by the largest drug company advertiser.
Want to guess how much control the advertising drug companies had over the editorial content of that "special" issue? While some of the articles told readers about how medicine had advanced into "alternative therapies," it was no surprise that chiropractic received only token mention.
It's easy to see how the advertising budgets of pharmaceutical companies could impact the media:
As you can see, selling editorial space is big business even in chiropractic. It has become such common practice, that many advertisers expect it. This publication has lost several advertisers because we refused to print their advertising-oriented press releases.
To better maintain our objectivity, Dynamic Chiropractic separated from the Motion Palpation Institute over a year ago. This eliminated the kind of ties that have potential for editorial conflict. DC feels free to present all sides of every issue without any self-interest.
It may seem hard to imagine, but chiropractors are one of the few sources of honest information about the hazards of pharmaceuticals. Chiropractic may become a lone voice amidst a media which is quickly selling out to the billions in drug dollars.
Keep your patients informed, keep them healthy, and keep them off drugs.
Donald M. Petersen Jr., BS, HCD(hc), FICC(h)
Editor/Publisher Dynamic Chiropractic
Don@DCMedia.com
Many relevant diagnostic signs are not performed deliberately by the examiner or by the patient at the examiner’s direction. They are observed as the patient reacts to their condition. Fortin’s finger sign, Minor’s sign, and Vanzetti’s sign are three examples of this principle.
Spearheaded by burgeoning scientific and clinical research literature, psychedelics have reached a level of media coverage and popular interest that has not been seen for over half a century. By “psychedelics,” we are referring to the unique class of substances that includes psilocybin (the active compound found in so-called “magic mushrooms”), LSD, dimethyltryptamine (DMT), ayahuasca, 5-MeO-DMT, and mescaline – each of which occurs in the natural world (except for LSD, which is a semi-synthetic compound).
While working at the Lovelace Medical Center in Albuquerque, N.M., one of the primary care physicians stated that imaging every patient prior to receiving chiropractic was not medically necessary. It was at that point I reconsidered the need for the imaging of every patient to avoid malpractice.
