Jump to content

Type keyword(s) to search

"It's teeny!": the World of Healthcare


Guest
  • Reply
  • Start Topic

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, mmecorday said:

Vraylar for bipolar disorder. Because it'll make you feel better if you're on a prescription drug that sounds like the name of a Targaryen king. Also, if this woman really made all those sandwiches, I hope they were distributed to homeless people.

 

I keep thinking "Where did she get that much bread?"

  • Love 4

I am oddly fascinated with the psoriatic arthritis one where they say “watch me”. I kind of like the strong one and her ballet moves (put here because she is not liked). The one who can make ham sandwiches to order and the guy we  assume is now great at pinball are the ones who got me scratching my head. Like I get her (even if she did get the bitch edit) but double fisting the ham sandwiches and having onlookers gawking at your skills at pinball?  The whole commercial is a mindfuck. 

  • Love 2
On 4/3/2018 at 10:21 AM, mmecorday said:

I have an irrational hated for the Neulasta commercials. One features a wife whose receiving chemo and in the other, a husband is the chemo patient. The idea is that if you take Neulasta, then you won't have to go back to the doctor's "just for a shot" after a day of chemo. Yes, but you might have to face some pretty rough side effects such as ruptured spleen (!)

I had to do a search to see if anyone has written about this monumentally annoying Neulasta commercial. Going back to the doctor's office "just for a shot." Yeah that's right, let's infantalize adults by not using the name of the medication and instead refer to it as "a shot" like you're a five-year-old at the pediatrician's office. Way to get people to take control of their own medical care. I cannot express how much I HATE this commercial and it gets worse .... "when you'd rather be HOME" and of course the word HOME is milked for all the cloying annoyingness it could possibly have. I don't even have to look at the images to know how truly awful this commercial is. 

 

There. I'm glad I finally got that out.

  • Love 7
On ‎5‎/‎21‎/‎2018 at 10:29 PM, Eliot said:

As someone whose mom died of lung cancer, I’d like to offer up a hearty “fuck you” to Bristol-Meyers Squibb and the agency who created those dreadful Opdivo (sp?) ads taunting cancer patients with “a chance to live longer.”

First of all, how much longer? I think it’s basically a couple of months, no? And I can assure you those people on that medication are not romping around on some mountainside having picnics, or going fishing with their grandchildren or whatever fuck-all these assholes have them doing.

And finally, to your smarmy, condescending, astonishingly obtuse question  “Who wouldn’t want a chance to live longer?” Maybe someone whose spirit and body and psyche are so broken and riddled with disease and despair that they’ve made the courageous decision to let go, die with dignity, and spend their last days surrounded by loved ones. How dare you shame them?

All the cancer medication adds bug me. 

Just seems pointless.  Presumably you are seeing an oncologist that will cover all this.  Its not like someone is going to be sitting at home with cancer, having not seen an oncologist, see the add and think, "Oh maybe I SHOULD see a doctor!"

And yes most of the time the longer life is a matter of weeks or months.  And at a cost of tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars

  • Love 8
21 minutes ago, DrSpaceman said:

All the cancer medication adds bug me. 

Just seems pointless.  Presumably you are seeing an oncologist that will cover all this.  Its not like someone is going to be sitting at home with cancer, having not seen an oncologist, see the add and think, "Oh maybe I SHOULD see a doctor!"

And yes most of the time the longer life is a matter of weeks or months.  And at a cost of tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars

Had ovarian cancer 27 years ago, breast cancer 6 years ago. Still here kicking and screaming.

  • Love 11
Quote

I had to do a search to see if anyone has written about this monumentally annoying Neulasta commercial. Going back to the doctor's office "just for a shot." Yeah that's right, let's infantalize adults by not using the name of the medication and instead refer to it as "a shot" like you're a five-year-old at the pediatrician's office. Way to get people to take control of their own medical care. I cannot express how much I HATE this commercial and it gets worse .... "when you'd rather be HOME" and of course the word HOME is milked for all the cloying annoyingness it could possibly have. I don't even have to look at the images to know how truly awful this commercial is. 

 

There. I'm glad I finally got that out.

Glad I could be of assistance. Patients on strong chemo do not look as healthy as the actors in these commercials. And I hate the way the person narrating the commercial says "home."

Quote

Had ovarian cancer 27 years ago, breast cancer 6 years ago. Still here kicking and screaming.

And I'm so very glad you are, chessiegal. Cancer has taken too many people from my life.

  • Love 5
On 6/24/2018 at 10:55 PM, mmecorday said:

And I'm so very glad you are, chessiegal. Cancer has taken too many people from my life.

Ditto. On both counts.

My latest cancer ad hate is for some drug that helps treat metastatic breast cancer. Now, I get that pharma companies feel the need to "nickname" ailments with cute little monikers like "a-Fib" or "ED" or "Low T" to make them seem like cool, hip diseases. But metastatic breast cancer is a miserable, horrible, nasty, hateful disease and I really, really resent it being demoted to the snappy little "MBC."

  • Love 8

And don't forget Hep-C.

Unfortunately, those MBC drugs can only extend a patient's life so much and you wonder what the quality of that life really is. I'd like to think it's all building forts with the grandkids and making a pie with a pregnant daughter, but really it's all about little victories like getting out of bed and making it through the day without throwing up.

  • Love 10
(edited)
On 7/9/2018 at 12:52 PM, Eliot said:

Now, I get that pharma companies feel the need to "nickname" ailments with cute little monikers like "a-Fib" or "ED" or "Low T" to make them seem like cool, hip diseases.

Don't forget "PD" - when you're "curved below the belt".  It's halfway through the commercial before they mention that this affects MEN and not until the very end that they refer to a urologist. I had to actually look up Peyronie's Disease to figure out what in the hell they were talking about, it was so cloaked in euphemism and oblique reference. 

Also, those people in the commercial are "Models for illustrative purposes. NOT ACTUAL PATIENTS." So... actors. Thanks. Without that disclaimer, I might have recognized one of them on the street and unjustly JUDGED HIS GENITALS, sight unseen, thinking he had PD.

Edited by CoyoteBlue
  • Love 6
Quote

Also, those people in the commercial are "Models for illustrative purposes. NOT ACTUAL PATIENTS." So... actors. Thanks. Without that disclaimer, I might have recognized one of them on the street and unjustly JUDGED HIS GENITALS, sight unseen, thinking he had PD.

I laughed so hard at this, I might have Pseudobulbar affect. Also, at first I thought they were saying Pierogi's Disease, which manages to sound both delicious and gross at the same time.

  • LOL 1
  • Love 7
On ‎7‎/‎25‎/‎2018 at 3:11 AM, Jamoche said:

"Moderate to severe" PBA, don't forget!

I actually do see some people with PBA and Nuedexta works well for it

But beyond the ads on TV, the screening tool the company came up with to check for it bugs me.  The drug reps are always pushing it.  Its a questionare, seven questions, you rate from 1-5 how often the questions apply to you.  What annoys me is 1 = "never applies to me", so the lowest score you can get is not 0, but a 7.  The scale is 7-35, which is just wrong.  You never have any symptoms, you get a 7, not a 0.  They could easily have scaled the thing differently, obviously some cheap ploy to up the scores and make it seem like the problem is more severe than it is.  I've mentioned it to several reps, they never have an answer as to who came up with that or why it scored that way. 

https://www.nuedextahcp.com/sites/default/files/pdf/CNS_LS_Questionnaire.pdf 

  • Love 1
7 hours ago, DrSpaceman73 said:

I actually do see some people with PBA and Nuedexta works well for it

But beyond the ads on TV, the screening tool the company came up with to check for it bugs me.  The drug reps are always pushing it.  Its a questionare, seven questions, you rate from 1-5 how often the questions apply to you.  What annoys me is 1 = "never applies to me", so the lowest score you can get is not 0, but a 7.  The scale is 7-35, which is just wrong.  You never have any symptoms, you get a 7, not a 0.  They could easily have scaled the thing differently, obviously some cheap ploy to up the scores and make it seem like the problem is more severe than it is.  I've mentioned it to several reps, they never have an answer as to who came up with that or why it scored that way. 

https://www.nuedextahcp.com/sites/default/files/pdf/CNS_LS_Questionnaire.pdf 

The only thing I can think of is that they've accounted for 7 meaning "never" because it means the person successfully answered each question with at least a minimal value. That way a score of 0 (initial value, no input yet) or anything < 7 would automatically mean the questionnaire could be kicked out as incomplete.

  • Love 5
On 9/7/2018 at 10:30 PM, CoderLady said:

The only thing I can think of is that they've accounted for 7 meaning "never" because it means the person successfully answered each question with at least a minimal value. That way a score of 0 (initial value, no input yet) or anything < 7 would automatically mean the questionnaire could be kicked out as incomplete.

You can't look at the questionnaire overall since any answer above a 1 would offset at least one unanswered question. But starting at 1 and giving an unanswered question a zero means that for each question they can see how many people didn't answer it and can do their stats on the actual responses.

True. An answer of 4 for one question, 3 for another and no answer for the other five questions still equals 7. The minimum valid total test wouldn't be the only test, just the first one.

Just speculation, of course. I couldn't resist trying to come up with a reason why a minimum score of 7 would be necessary but it's just a guess after all. 

I don’t remember the name of the drug, but yesterday I saw a commercial for a drug marketed for blind people having issues with circadian rhythms. Which is fine, but the guy claimed his issues were causing him to show up early or arrive late for events.  Wouldn’t it just be a lot simpler to buy a clock?  Even people with perfect sight would arrive early or late if they didn’t occasionally consult some method of determining what time it is. 

  • Love 1
2 hours ago, InDueTime said:

The ad for DermaSuction, which is pretty much a vacuum cleaner for faces, is disgusting. I had to look away at the constant collection of pus/oil/etc., and I usually don't get squeamish or grossed out watching stuff like that.

 

I posted on the annoy thread that I woke up in the wee hours yesterday and that I was watching Bewitched on Logo in hopes it would lull me to sleep, and this commercial came on every commercial break! Makes me wonder if there is marketing research that says insomniacs will call in to buy this crap.

On ‎9‎/‎17‎/‎2018 at 5:38 PM, LoneHaranguer said:

Since when does any drug company promise anything about their products?

The bad thing about healthcare ads is first you have to suffer through the ads for the products, and then, a few years later, you have to suffer through the ads for the lawyers suing the companies that made those products.  (I'm looking at you Yaz!)

Edited by Tom Holmberg
  • Love 5
18 hours ago, mmecorday said:

I see ads for Xarelto all the time -- followed by ads urging people who have taken Xarelto and suffered serious or fatal bleeding to call a number to get in on a class action suit.

Maybe the ABA (Big Lawya)  should start funding the AMA (Big Pharma).  The perfect endless loop.

  • Love 4

I've recently seen an ad for Botox that shows three women - one outdoors in the forest, taking photos; one sashaying around some kind of hipster office; and one in ballet work-out gear in a dance studio.  All three with their perfectly smooth Botoxed faces, moving in oh such exquisite slow-motion showing us how much better life is, how much more graceful and successful and creative a woman can be, when she has an extremely toxic chemical injected into her face to remove all the laugh lines, crinkles and wrinkles. 

I cannot find the words to describe how offensive I find this concept.  Whoever dreamed up this add needs to have botox injected where the sun don't shine.

  • Love 7
On 1/16/2019 at 1:01 AM, Jamoche said:

Dear eczema meds ads: You can show the itchy skin. You can say it feels like ants crawling all over you. But for the love of all things holy, don't show ants crawling all over the person's hands!

I hate that they’re ramping up the visuals on these ads.  There’s one for psoriasis that shows vines growing all over the body.  It makes my skin crawl and all I want to do is change the channel.  I have eczema myself, and it sucks.  But you can sympathize without wanting to scratch yourself silly.

  • Love 3

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...