Archive for June 28th, 2005

Glowing Like A Glow Worm

Tuesday, June 28th, 2005

Not good news for people in Washington state (like me), and especially, those who have the misfortune of living near the Hanford nuclear mess. New studies in Richland, Washington have revealed that the local Hanford Nuclear site has contaminated the area far more than previously thought. For the first time, plutonium has been found in clams and fish in the Columbia River. In addition, radiation levels of area mulberries are so high, eating less than a teaspoon full of the berries would cause a person to exceed EPA maximum allowable risk levels for an entire year.

Mmm, I wonder if those mulberries give your skin that extra sheen? That glow that you thought could only be achieved with make-up?

From the Environment News Service

Come On AMA, Do Tell All

Tuesday, June 28th, 2005

The American Medical Association wants to investigate the impact of drug advertising on consumers, but what about on doctors? How much money is spent on consumers vs. doctors? That is what a consumer would like the AMA to tell us: How much are they paying you?

Consumer Group Challenges the American Medical Association to Disclose Advertising Dollars From Drug Companies; AMA’s Advertising Revenue is Twice as Much As Subscription Revenue

Santa Monica, CA — A consumer group called on the American Medical Association (AMA) today to disclose the amount of advertising money that the AMA collects from drug companies in the wake of the AMA’s announcement that it will “investigate” the impact of drug company advertising on consumers. In the June 15 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association, 9 of the 16 full page advertisements were for pharmaceuticals, including the first six pages and the inside and back covers.

The AMA’s announcement failed to acknowledge the fact that drug companies spent five times more on marketing to physicians, including advertising in journals, than they do on advertising to consumers.

A large body of research has found that pharmaceutical advertising and marketing to doctors has led to increased prescribing, use and possibly over-use of prescription drugs.

“The AMA’s feigned concern for the fate of patients targeted by drug advertising makes about as much sense as a pusher enrolling his customers in drug-addicts anonymous,” said Jerry Flanagan of the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights. “Patients and doctors have a right to know how much advertising money the AMA’s journal receives from drug companies. Drug companies spend five times as much on marketing to doctors than they do advertising to consumers because they know their profits depend upon whether a doctor is motivated to prescribe the newest blockbuster.”

According to the AMA’s 2003 tax return, the AMA receives two times more money in advertising dollars than it does from subscriptions. In 2003, the latest data available, the AMA received $41,123,622 from advertising revenue, compared to $17,677,540 from subscription fees. The AMA’s advertising revenue accounts for 45% of the group’s total program revenue.

In 2000 (the latest data available) drug companies spent $4.8 billion on “physician detailing,” the practice of sending marketers to doctors’ offices to encourage doctors to prescribe a company’s drugs. In the same year, drug companies spent $2.4 billion on consumer advertising. Total physician promotional spending by drug companies in 2000 was $13.2 billion, including $484 million for journal advertising.

In 2004, Pfizer settled a lawsuit for $430 million with the U.S. Attorney General’s office that alleged that the company had promoted its anti-convulsant medication, Neurontin, to doctors for “off-label” treatments — those not approved by the FDA.

The Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights (FTCR) is a leading nonpartisan and nonprofit consumer advocacy organization. For more information, visit us on the web at: http://www.ConsumerWatchdog.org

Talk About Bizarre

Tuesday, June 28th, 2005

Imagine being a teenage boy, having a stomach ache, and then all of a sudden finding out that you’re the father of a dead fetus!

No, this is not from Jerry Springer or Oprah’s freak of the week. And yes, unbelievable as it may seem, there is a scientific reason for it. And no, the boy was not pregnant.

Doctors in Bangladesh say they have removed a long-dead foetus from the abdomen of a teenage boy who was complaining of stomach pains.

They said the foetus would have become the boy’s twin had it grown normally in their mother’s womb.

They said it was a case of an extremely rare condition where two foetuses are conceived as conjoined twins but one absorbs the other.

Talk about truth being stranger than fiction. The fetus weighed about 4.5 pounds. Yikes, that must’ve caused one helluva stomach ache.

Read the article in the BBC.