MARC Record from harvard_bibliographic_metadata

LEADER: 03951cam a2200529 i 4500
001 000722780-9
005 20090722125414.0
008 760727s1976 cau b 00110 eng
010 $a 75027935 //r88
035 0 $aocm02277688
040 $aDLC$cDLC$dMQM
043 $acl-----
050 0 $aRM301$b.S53
060 00 $aQV 736$bS587d 1976
082 $a614.3/5/098
100 1 $aSilverman, Milton,$d1910-
245 14 $aThe drugging of the Americas :$bhow multinational drug companies say one thing about their products to physicians in the United States, and another thing to physicians in Latin America /$cby Milton Silverman.
260 0 $aBerkeley :$bUniversity of California Press,$cc1976.
300 $axiv, 147 p. ;$c25 cm.
504 $aIncludes bibliographical references and index.
505 0 $aIntroduction -- Antibiotics -- Oral contraceptives -- Nonsteroid antiarthritics -- Steroid hormones -- Antipsychotic tranquilizers -- Antidepressants -- Anticonvulsants -- Discussion: the epidemiology of drug promotion.
520 $aIn the United States, drug companies promoting their products to physicians are required by law to limit their claims to what they can prove, and to make full disclosure of all known hazards. Dr. Silverman, a noted science writer and pharmacologist, finds that many multinational drug companies are circumventing similar laws in Latin America in order to sell more of their products. The author provides detailed comparisons of the promotion of 28 separate prescription drugs in the U.S. and in Mexico, Central America, and other Latin American countries. Typically, claims for effectiveness are exaggerated in Latin America and the hazards are glossed over. This practice, denounced by Latin American medical experts and appalling even to scientists within the drug industry, is blamed for needless patient injury and death. When called upon to explain the inconsistencies in their promotional campaigns, their standard defense is "we're not breaking any laws." But some of these global companies have been breaking laws. They have been lying. In the United States, the major pharmaceutical companies have long and vociferously assailed the laws which now require them to restrict claims of efficacy of their products to those they can support with substantial scientific evidence and to inform physicians fully of all hazards. The companies argue that these rules are excessively harsh and that these laws and regulations are not necessary because the industry recognizes its social responsibilities and would live up to them, laws or no laws. The information presented here is a partial response to such an argument. It demonstrates that a problem exists and shows how some companies comport themselves when there are no restrictive laws, or when the laws are not enforced. -- from Preface.
650 0 $aDeceptive advertising$zLatin America.
650 0 $aDrugs$xSide effects.
650 0 $aPharmaceutical industry$zLatin America.
650 2 $aAdvertising as Topic
650 2 $aDrug Industry
650 2 $aDrug Therapy$xadverse effects
651 2 $aLatin America
651 2 $aUnited States
651 2 $aUnited States.
650 0 $aPharmaceutical industry$xEthics.
650 0 $aDeceptive advertising.
650 0 $aAdvertising$xDrugs.
650 0 $aAmbiguity in advertising.
650 0 $aDrugs$xMarketing.
650 0 $aPharmaceutical industry$xCorrupt practices.
650 0 $aPharmaceutical industry$xCorrupt practices$zDeveloping countries.
650 0 $aAdvertising laws.
650 2 $aAdvertising as Topic$zLatin America.
650 2 $aAdvertising as Topic$zUnited States.
650 2 $aDrug Industry$zLatin America.
650 2 $aDrug Industry$zUnited States.
650 2 $aDrug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions$zLatin America.
650 2 $aDrug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions$zUnited States.
988 $a20070630
906 $0DLC