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

[Tom Holmberg]

Apparently we now have the scourge of "Ozempic face"!

https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/ozempic-face-before-and-after-photos-weight-loss-b2270262.html

 

[Colleenna]

On 1/31/2023 at 11:56 AM, Tom Holmberg said:

Apparently we now have the scourge of "Ozempic face"!

https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/ozempic-face-before-and-after-photos-weight-loss-b2270262.html

 

"Ozempic face." Yeah, that's what I have! Never mind that I've never taken that drug and that I'm 75. It's the drug, I say! 😄

[Madding crowd]

Has anyone noticed that you are unable to fast forward through some drug commercials when you are watching a recorded show? I DVR some shows on DISH network and for the last few months have noticed I can’t FF through several drug commercials especially those for HIV. It just takes me back to the beginning of the commercial.

[Welshman in Ca]

18 hours ago, Madding crowd said:

Has anyone noticed that you are unable to fast forward through some drug commercials when you are watching a recorded show? I DVR some shows on DISH network and for the last few months have noticed I can’t FF through several drug commercials especially those for HIV. It just takes me back to the beginning of the commercial.

Nothing that gets DVRd. Do you have the names of the drugs ?

[Madding crowd]

I couldn't begin to remember the spelling of the drugs without having a pen and paper handy but it is all of the HIV prep medications and a couple of other ones. I will try to pay more attention to the names in the future. 

[Maverick]

 Anyone else think the chubby speedo dad in the Sotyktu commercial is on the DL?  Just me?  Ok. 

[Tom Holmberg]

17 hours ago, Maverick said:

 Anyone else think the chubby speedo dad in the Sotyktu commercial is on the DL?  Just me?  Ok. 

I just thought he enjoyed exposing himself to his teen-aged daughter.

[Tom Holmberg]

I have a feeling the drug companies have run out of names for drugs that have some relation to human language and now just used random letters.  I'm waiting for Mxyzptlk, for moderate to severe idiocy.

[Prevailing Wind]

1 hour ago, Tom Holmberg said:

I have a feeling the drug companies have run out of names for drugs that have some relation to human language and now just used random letters.  I'm waiting for Mxyzptlk, for moderate to severe idiocy.

My ophthalmologist told me the companies submit 3 names to the FDA - it's the FDA that makes the final choice.  (We were discussing creating a new game - "Drug or Star Trek Alien?"  You know - "Captain, we're approaching the Ozempic system and are being followed by a un-cloaked Jardiance ship"  or "I'm taking Cardassia for my moderate-to-severe wanderlust syndrome.")

Edited May 13, 2023 by Prevailing Wind

[Tom Holmberg]

12 minutes ago, Prevailing Wind said:

My ophthalmologist told me the companies submit 3 names to the FDA - it's the FDA that makes the final choice.  (We were discussing creating a new game - "Drug or Star Trek Alien?"  You know - "Captain, we're approaching the Ozempic system and are being followed by a un-cloaked Jardiance ship"  or "I'm taking Cardassia for my moderate-to-severe wanderlust syndrome.")

Good game

[CrystalBlue]

Now I'm wondering if the pharma companies recycle the rejected names and eventually Abcohohohxyz gets used instead of Lmnopexerski for the mild-to-moderate malady of the day.

[Prevailing Wind]

2 hours ago, CrystalBlue said:

Now I'm wondering if the pharma companies recycle the rejected names and eventually Abcohohohxyz gets used instead of Lmnopexerski for the mild-to-moderate malady of the day.

They probably do. I'm sure they spend a LOT of money to determine those 3 names. Why let 'em go to waste?

 

[Haleth]

I remember reading somewhere that pharma names were based on certain consonant sounds being more pleasing than others.  I can't remember what they were though.

[Tom Holmberg]

How long before the lawyer ads against the new Opill OTC birth control pill start running? 

[Gramto6]

1 hour ago, Tom Holmberg said:

How long before the lawyer ads against the new Opill OTC birth control pill start running? 

Oh, maybe 9 months or a bit more...   :-)

[Tom Holmberg]

14 minutes ago, Gramto6 said:

Oh, maybe 9 months or a bit more...   :-)

That's actually what I was thinking. 

[Shrek]

On 7/13/2023 at 1:21 PM, Gramto6 said:

Oh, maybe 9 months or a bit more...   :-)

As it's not going to be on shelves until next year that sounds about right for the gestation period.

[Prevailing Wind]

I don't lawsuits are gonna come from intended babies, but more side effects the user didn't pay attention to until it was too far gone.

 

[Gramto6]

1 hour ago, Prevailing Wind said:

I don't lawsuits are gonna come from intended babies, but more side effects the user didn't pay attention to until it was too far gone.

 

If the people are trying to have a baby, intending to get pregnant , they probably won't be taking birth control pills. I see the lawsuits could come if an unwanted pregnancy happens while taking the pills. And yes, the risk of side effects is also of concern.

Edited July 15, 2023 by Gramto6

[Tom Holmberg]

On 7/14/2023 at 8:35 PM, Prevailing Wind said:

I don't lawsuits are gonna come from intended babies, but more side effects the user didn't pay attention to until it was too far gone.

 

I would say unintended side effects.  It seems that almost every birth control device heavily advertised ended up with lawyer commercials for law suits.

[docmatt]

I appreciate that Jardience used an actress who probably does have type II diabetes, but the song is annoying and horrible. And how much do they hate her to dress her like she's chewing gum at Willy Wonka's?

[Danielg342]

Seems like Canada has now entered the world of being subjected to horrible drug ads.

For a long while (at least as far as I can remember), you never did see prescription drugs being advertised on Canadian TV. I used to think there was an outright ban on the practice in Canada, but the reality is, Canadian law simply prohibits prescription drug advertisers from explicitly saying what their drug does.

Plus, prescription drugs are more regulated than they are in the U.S., which means drug companies had little incentive to advertise.

Until now.

The makers of the diabetic drug semaglutide- under the brand names Ozempic and Rybelsus- have found a simple (but highly annoying) loophole that allows them to produce ads for Canadian television.

Yes, there are two different spots (one for each brand) but the execution is the same- the commercial features a bunch of people (all of whom who are, tellingly, overweight) ostensibly having a conversation but all they really do is blurt out the brand name several times in awkward exchanges that's designed to repeat the brand name and sear it into your head.

To wit, the Rybelsus ad has a coffee shop barista "accidentally" believe one of her customers was named "Rybelsus".

Even more annoying than the repetition is that each commercial has one character who starts to explain what the drug does but, once they get to the part where they would actually provide exposition, some loud machine- a drill in the Ozempic ad, the coffee brewing machine in the Rybelsus ad- goes off, preventing anyone from hearing the explanation.

This allows the ad to end where a character will say "I'll definitely ask my doctor if Ozempic/Rybelsus is right for me".

Are the ads effective? In terms of making me remember the brands, they sure are.

I suppose, too, the ads are so annoying and frustrating that I eventually had to give in and look up the drugs just to find out what they do.

...but, maybe that's me. There may be others who may get so frustrated with the ads and so annoyed by them that they just switch it off because they don't care about what the drugs do.

The other thing too, is- rightly or wrongly- we have a large segment of the population who has an intense distrust of public health, healthcare and pharmaceutical companies in general. Is it really a good idea to have a law on the books forcing companies to produce cagey ads where people wonder about some mystery drug?

Besides, ultimately, if the point of the Canadian law was to prevent prescription drug advertising, the makers of semaglutide have proven that it doesn't work.

Given, too, that there are apparently so many people asking for semaglutide  who want to lose weight but don't really need the drug that there's now a shortage for those who really do need the drug, maybe it's time to see if our drug laws truly need changing because that shouldn't happen.

Ideally, I don't think drug companies should be advertising to the general public (since there's a reason why prescription drugs are controlled and regulated), but if we're going to have drug advertisements, then take off the shackles.

I mean, as much as I find the American ads ridiculous ("you'll get rid of that ugly birthmark on your toe, but you'll also get cancer!"), at least the American ads are not cagey. I know what the drug does and can make an informed decision about whether or not it will help me, which I would then use to follow up with my doctor.

Sounds like a better idea than an ad where I get so annoyed by it I want to shut off the TV, not learn more about it.

[Tom Holmberg]

2 hours ago, Danielg342 said:

Seems like Canada has now entered the world of being subjected to horrible drug ads.

For a long while (at least as far as I can remember), you never did see prescription drugs being advertised on Canadian TV. I used to think there was an outright ban on the practice in Canada, but the reality is, Canadian law simply prohibits prescription drug advertisers from explicitly saying what their drug does.

Plus, prescription drugs are more regulated than they are in the U.S., which means drug companies had little incentive to advertise.

Until now.

The makers of the diabetic drug semaglutide- under the brand names Ozempic and Rybelsus- have found a simple (but highly annoying) loophole that allows them to produce ads for Canadian television.

Yes, there are two different spots (one for each brand) but the execution is the same- the commercial features a bunch of people (all of whom who are, tellingly, overweight) ostensibly having a conversation but all they really do is blurt out the brand name several times in awkward exchanges that's designed to repeat the brand name and sear it into your head.

To wit, the Rybelsus ad has a coffee shop barista "accidentally" believe one of her customers was named "Rybelsus".

Even more annoying than the repetition is that each commercial has one character who starts to explain what the drug does but, once they get to the part where they would actually provide exposition, some loud machine- a drill in the Ozempic ad, the coffee brewing machine in the Rybelsus ad- goes off, preventing anyone from hearing the explanation.

This allows the ad to end where a character will say "I'll definitely ask my doctor if Ozempic/Rybelsus is right for me".

Are the ads effective? In terms of making me remember the brands, they sure are.

I suppose, too, the ads are so annoying and frustrating that I eventually had to give in and look up the drugs just to find out what they do.

...but, maybe that's me. There may be others who may get so frustrated with the ads and so annoyed by them that they just switch it off because they don't care about what the drugs do.

The other thing too, is- rightly or wrongly- we have a large segment of the population who has an intense distrust of public health, healthcare and pharmaceutical companies in general. Is it really a good idea to have a law on the books forcing companies to produce cagey ads where people wonder about some mystery drug?

Besides, ultimately, if the point of the Canadian law was to prevent prescription drug advertising, the makers of semaglutide have proven that it doesn't work.

Given, too, that there are apparently so many people asking for semaglutide  who want to lose weight but don't really need the drug that there's now a shortage for those who really do need the drug, maybe it's time to see if our drug laws truly need changing because that shouldn't happen.

Ideally, I don't think drug companies should be advertising to the general public (since there's a reason why prescription drugs are controlled and regulated), but if we're going to have drug advertisements, then take off the shackles.

I mean, as much as I find the American ads ridiculous ("you'll get rid of that ugly birthmark on your toe, but you'll also get cancer!"), at least the American ads are not cagey. I know what the drug does and can make an informed decision about whether or not it will help me, which I would then use to follow up with my doctor.

Sounds like a better idea than an ad where I get so annoyed by it I want to shut off the TV, not learn more about it.

At least they aren't dancing and singing...yet!

[Danielg342]

On 8/11/2023 at 9:09 AM, Tom Holmberg said:

At least they aren't dancing and singing...yet!

LOL.

I somehow don't think we're that far off. Nothing like a fast-paced, driving but repetitive rock jingle to make the drug sound better than it actually is.

[Tom Holmberg]

15 hours ago, Danielg342 said:

LOL.

I somehow don't think we're that far off. Nothing like a fast-paced, driving but repetitive rock jingle to make the drug sound better than it actually is.

Especially the opioids. 😈

[mmecorday]

It really takes so little to get that Jardiance jingle stuck in my head ...

[Browncoat]

29 minutes ago, mmecorday said:

It really takes so little to get that Jardiance jingle stuck in my head ...

Thanks a lot.  Now it's in mine, too.

Edited August 14, 2023 by Browncoat