this post was submitted on 14 Jun 2025
752 points (99.2% liked)

United States | News & Politics

3002 readers
1366 users here now

Welcome to !usa@midwest.social, where you can share and converse about the different things happening all over/about the United States.

If you’re interested in participating, please subscribe.

Rules

Be respectful and civil. No racism/bigotry/hateful speech.

Post anything related to the United States.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Dorkyd68@lemmy.world 2 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago)

Now get big pharma out of psychedelic research and ban them from lining the pockets of fda employees.

To clarify im all for psychedelics, and want them legal. But if big pharma gets in the way they'll ruin our natural plant based medicine. For example they are trying to create a psilocybin drug to take without euphoric or hallucinagenic properties and without those the experience is completely ruined. Shrooms and other psychedelics work for ptsd, anxiety because of these experiences, you cant have a good experience without them

[–] _AutumnMoon_@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 8 hours ago

this drug cures the common cold, side effects may include:ᶜᵃⁿᶜᵉʳ,ᵐᵃʲᵒʳˢᶦᶜᵏⁿᵉˢˢ,ᵈᵉᵃᵗʰ,ˡᶦᵐᵇˢᶠᵃˡˡᶦⁿᵍᵒᶠᶠ,ˢᵖᵒⁿᵗᵃⁿᵉᵒᵘˢᶜᵒᵐᵇᵘˢᵗᶦᵒⁿ

[–] RagnarokOnline@programming.dev 5 points 14 hours ago

Fucking PUH-LEEZE! If I have to see another plaque psoriasis ad during my dinner time viewing of Love After Lockup, I’m gonna blow chunks

[–] pyre@lemmy.world 15 points 21 hours ago (2 children)

it's unbelievable that the us has straight up drug ads to consumers

[–] Anomalocaris@lemm.ee 7 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

world most overpriced drugs, and ads.

in most of the world that would be a ridiculously sci fi dystopia that no one would think is possible

[–] Soulg@ani.social 4 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

At least we're not the only one! Iirc new Zealand does/did as well

[–] Anomalocaris@lemm.ee 5 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

we just had a no kings protests.

[–] OrteilGenou@lemmy.world 4 points 17 hours ago

srsly wtf bernie

[–] kayky@thelemmy.club 23 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Great start.

Advertising in general should be illegal.

[–] piccolo@sh.itjust.works 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

But but how will companies convince you their shity quality products is what everyone is buying??

[–] boaratio@lemmy.world 1 points 23 hours ago

Yeah, how will I know what drug of the week to demand my doctor prescribe to me?

[–] Kolanaki@pawb.social 16 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

"Ask your doctor if Phuckettal is right for you today!"

No. The doctor should be telling me what I need; not me telling them what I want. It's not a fucking candy store. Not only do I hate the ads, I hate not knowing with certainty if I am being prescribed something because I need it or if the pharma company that makes the drug simply pays the doctor to prescribe it. 😬

[–] SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social 29 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Sounds complicated. What if we just banned all ads?

[–] kayky@thelemmy.club 7 points 1 day ago

That would take away a major advantage rich people have over us, so you'd better believe the useful idiots among us will not support it.

[–] BMW_stick@lemmy.world 12 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] Pilferjinx@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It fucking sucks that he is kneecapped by every other politician and is rendered mostly to just a voice.

[–] BMW_stick@lemmy.world 1 points 17 hours ago

Disgusting isn't it? I firmly believe that if Bernie had become president in 2016 and or 2020, Trump's name would be nothing more than board game worthy. The Democratic party gave us trump.

[–] charade_you_are@sh.itjust.works 49 points 2 days ago (2 children)

If this is passed(lol), then it will put a lot of actors who specialize in pretending to garden out of work.

[–] kayky@thelemmy.club 4 points 1 day ago

Good!

Everyone involved in advertising can get real jobs instead of being paid to psychologically manipulate us with fake smiles!

[–] IphtashuFitz@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago

Not to mention the people who come up with all that cheesy music and lyrics that try to rhyme with the nonsensical words the industry uses for drug names.

[–] barneypiccolo@lemm.ee 22 points 1 day ago (2 children)

There was a time when ads for both pharmaceuticals and lawyers were both illegal. Considering how many of each I see every day, it makes me wonder how they filled their ad schedules in the olden days.

[–] chiliedogg@lemmy.world 17 points 1 day ago

Laundry detergent and other household cleaners targeting stay-at-home wives.

It's why daytime dramas are called Soap Operas.

[–] gramie@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I have barely watched non-streaming TV for probably a decade or more, but I believe that in Canada it is much more difficult to advertise pharmaceuticals or law services. I think they can do it, but there are a lot of restrictions.

Certainly when I'm ~~subjected~~ exposed to American TV, the number of pharmaceutical commercials is staggering.

[–] barneypiccolo@lemm.ee 1 points 1 day ago

I don't know about lawyers, but as far as I know, the only two countries that allow pharmaceuticals advertising are the United States and New Zealand.

[–] magnetosphere@fedia.io 33 points 1 day ago

Prescription drug ads are a global oddity to begin with. Last I heard, only the U.S. and New Zealand allow them.

Even if this doesn't pass, get rid of the fucking jardiance musical commercials.

[–] subignition@fedia.io 84 points 2 days ago

Finally, some good fucking legislation

If we get pissed off enough as a country we can make this happen

[–] QuoVadisHomines@sh.itjust.works 66 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Drug ads were only legalized in the 1990s. It was much better to not have to constantly see them.

[–] reddig33@lemmy.world 56 points 2 days ago (1 children)

1980s. Brought to you by Reagan.

“Fast-forward to the 1980s: while Ronald Reagan was telling Americans to "Just Say No," the feds cozied up to the pharmaceutical industry, and relaxed their legal restrictions. Direct-to-consumer marketing (DTCM), what you probably know as "drug commercials," was first given the seal of approval in the US in 1985.”

https://www.thrillist.com/health/nation/why-are-prescription-drug-advertisements-legal-in-america

[–] QuoVadisHomines@sh.itjust.works 31 points 2 days ago

"Drug commercials as you know them really only began in 1997, when constraints were further loosened, and new meds began to feature in television commercials. For its part, the FDA notes that no federal law has ever outlawed drug ads, justifying its progressively lax regulation."

The next paragraph explains why I mention the 1990sbecause before then you would have to have printed on screen the side effects.

[–] bieren@lemmy.zip 24 points 2 days ago (2 children)

How else will I know what drugs to tell me doctor I have to take for diseases I don’t have?

[–] barneypiccolo@lemm.ee 5 points 1 day ago

Viewers think those ads are aimed at them, but many of them are for such specific versions of a disease, that the viewership must be extremely tiny. They wouldn't spend that kind of money to reach such a miniscule audience.

The ads are really aimed at the doctors themselves. A doctor with a specific specialty may have several patients that the drug might help. That's whose attention they are trying to get.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world 36 points 2 days ago (2 children)

But then how will they try to defend exorbitant drug prices when they no longer have tens of millions of dollars of advertising expenditures and are still developing drugs largely via publicly funded research?

[–] barneypiccolo@lemm.ee 3 points 1 day ago

Think of how insanely expensive those ads are: Besides the exorbitant cost of running them multiple times a day on numerous expensive broadcast channels during every day part, there's the production costs.

Big casts, big crew, location shooting, lots of costumes, etc. Then there is the music. They tend to use great classic rock songs, which carry extremely heavy royalty rates. In addition, they usually change the arrangement, and even write new lyrics. Changing the lyrics costs a FORTUNE.

The costs for the ad before it even runs, is incredible. The marketing costs for the entire campaign must be enormous. No wonder prescription drug costs are so high.

[–] atomicbocks@sh.itjust.works 5 points 2 days ago

Hey, those bonuses and stock buybacks aren’t going to pay for themselves!!!

[–] melsaskca@lemmy.ca 20 points 2 days ago

My first thought was they meant trump when they said King. SMH.

[–] negativenull@lemmy.world 15 points 2 days ago

There goes the Golf channel

[–] BotsRuinedEverything@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago (2 children)

LMFAO. Yeah that will totally pass. The billionaire class totally wants to nerf their biggest source of revenue.

[–] kayky@thelemmy.club 1 points 1 day ago

It probably won't pass, but we should still be fighting back.

[–] Sunshine@lemmy.ca 10 points 2 days ago (1 children)

It’s good to have independents!

[–] kayky@thelemmy.club 4 points 1 day ago

Yeah, democrats hate him because he's not beholden to the ruling class.

Fuck democrats and republicans.

[–] mkhopper@lemmy.world 6 points 2 days ago (1 children)

But what will be shown during the nightly national news programs??
If they can't run same 12 medical ads every, fucking, day, whatever will they do?

If I never have to hear that idiotic Jardiance song again, I would be so happy.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] magic_smoke@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Great bill but feels like throwing a diet coke can's worth of water onto the worlds greasiest fire.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›