Writes RFK Jr., on X.... in A PARODY ACCOUNT.
ADDED: Why isn't this what RFK Jr. would say and do?
March 24, 2025
"I'm thrilled to announce that we're ending pharmaceutical ads in television. America is corrupted by Big Pharma."
"For years, they’ve pushed drugs like candy, silenced critics, lobbied the Congress and the White House, and cashed in on manufactured fear. Big Pharma, through drug advertisements, are also a huge source of income for mainstream media, effectively controlling the media outlets. Soros and USAID aren't the only ones who use the mainstream media to perpetuate propaganda. ALL THESE WILL END NOW."
Writes RFK Jr., on X.... in A PARODY ACCOUNT.
Writes RFK Jr., on X.... in A PARODY ACCOUNT.
Posts
55 comments:
That account linked is not JFKjr. It's one of those frustrating 'parody' click bait accounts
My wife likes to buy US magazines to read the pharmaceutical ads. She's a retired dentist.
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. | Commentary only
@RFKJr_Official
My pronouns: Prosecute/Fauci. I post commentary, news, and updates on politics and health. Parody account. No affiliation.
No worry. If true, slip and fall lawyers will fill any advertising void.
Why isn't this what RFK Jr. would say and do?
What's the parody supposed to be?
I get it. It's a parody account. Not fighting anyone over that!
why do pharmaceuticals underwrite almost all commercial tv, and does that prevent any scrutiny of those products,
Damn, so disappointed to learn that it's not really going to happen.
OK, but hey, Bobby, could you at least rid us of those old guys peddling vegetable and fruit pills?...
…oopsie but to add to the conversation about it- I see there is obvious opposition from pharma and TV and Trump haters. The big strategy seems to be First Amendment claims. If so Phillip Morris and Altria would like a word…and shut the drapes because the pot companies are looking in…
RFK might not say it because there are First Amendment issues associated with a ban on truthful commercial speech. There would need to be a strong record that the ads are false in some material sense.
Can't do that it would harm the networks!
@Narciso, who wonders "why do pharmaceuticals underwrite almost all commercial tv"
Something you need to understand about the media is that you can't control the media if you're not an advertiser. Advertising in newspapers for example does two very powerful things:
1) It reminds people that you have a product you'd like them to buy.
2) You now own the publisher of that newspaper.
The publisher of that newspaper isn't going to send his reporters out to undermine the efficacy of your COVID19 "vaccine" (that isn't even a vaccine) if they are dependent on your revenue for their profits. Especially true if the newspaper company is publicly traded.
You don't even have to threaten them (which might be illegal). They have already figured out which side their bread is buttered on.
The power of journalism is the power to keep things OUT of the newspaper. Not in them.
I've said here before back when I was at school the big pharmaceutical stat was the Ad budget was the same size as the R&D budget. I think the ad budget included all the hot boys and girls they hire to sell to doctors and get past the nurses and receptionists…
If someone could just outlaw that creepy anime bipolar drug ad, I would give them my lifetime loyalty oath.
JSM
I wish this were true. It was a bad move to green light direct to consumer drug advertising. I remember well when it happened. There was a noticeably large uptick in patients requesting specific medications for their conditions because they saw it on TV, and very few accepted the explanations of why older, less expensive and safer drugs were a better choice; and now we have the unforeseen consequence of pharmaceutical industry owning the media.
I used to watch M*A*S*H* on MeTV. And it always amused me to see what age group advertisers were targeting: mine. With all those ads about drugs to fix your problems. Wasted on me.
As a retired psychologist, I cannot stand the anti-depressant ads that market to the consumer rather than the practitioner.
You know, "If your antidepressant is not working, why not try even more anti-depressant?"
The Pharma companies made out big during the Covid hysteria and they are hoping to addict us to pills that will solve all our problems.
My first thought was that finally a common sense policy implemented by the Trump Administration. Guess we'll have to wait, same with getting rid of pennies and nickels.
Aw, just when I was thinking he got something right, it's a parody.
The Pusher
Well now if I were the president of this land
You know I'd declare total war on the pusher man.
I'd cut him if he stands, and I'd shoot him if he run,
And I'd kill him with my bible, and my razor and my gun....
GOD DAMN! The pusher
God damn the pusher.
I said God damn! God damn the pusher man!
RFK might not say it because there are First Amendment issues associated with a ban on truthful commercial speech.
I'm not up to date with the 1st Amendement free speech law, but there seems to be no problem in banning tabacco ads on TV. If there are decisions on point, then there's nothing wrong in making the regulation and letting the SCOTUS decide it's constitutionality
Definitely a high priority wish-list item for many of us in the health freedom corner, and there's a general impression that RFKJr is very sympathetic if not in total agreement on this one.
OTOH, I've gotten the impression (rightly or wrongly) that this would require congressional majorities, and a will in the leadership to take up the item. If that's the case, I don't think the votes are there as of yet, and I'm not sure that Trump has signed on, either.
There's a whole bunch of fake accounts of famous people out there that are labeled parody but that is only to get around the rules and laws. They are trying to get clicks and follows and links, not do real parody. X is flooded with these now. It's often close enough to what the real person would say or do, or we want them to, it's often hard to tell. Very frustrating, but part of the escalating war between real and fake news
"If your antidepressant is not working, why not try even more anti-depressant?"
The ones that really get me are the SSRI ads which promise to cure your depression, but you may have suicidal thoughts as a side-effect. WTF?!!
It's a selfie-parody. A satirical perspective of vaxxxers, drug peddlers, and other scientific misfits profiting from social dysphoria feeding the kleptocracy at the forward-looking risk to the People, our Posterity, and national viability.
Chantix should probably be banned,
It's not just the pharma companies, it's also Big Pillow.
Wait till Big Pharma takes over AI, and Grok won't tell you anything without asking you about geographic atrophy and recommending IZERVAY™.
That Nigerian Prince still needs your help!
Why isn't this what RFK Jr. would say and do?
Because he knows better. He may be a bit of a crackpot, but he's not an idiot.
Izervay, oh vey,
How we got here:
The FDA said in 1985 that drug makers could air ads, but they also had to follow rigid rules for disclosing side effects and other information. That made the kind of ads we see today — specific health claims by specific drugs — implausible. It also meant Big Pharma wasn’t racing to put out a lot more TV ads.
But in the mid-’90s, Schering-Plough and others started poking another hole in the dam.
The company put a huge television campaign for Claritin on the air. It was cautious: The ads still never actually said what Claritin was for. One of the ads implored viewers, again and again, to see their doctor.
“It’s time,” said a sunny voice matching the sunny visuals.
The FDA had already started to reexamine its policies on television ads, but many experts credit the Claritin ad and others like it with forcing the agency to act.
The FDA decided in 1997 to relax its rules. Source
I have been telling my wife that pharmaceutical ads should be banned for years. I read the headline with great joy only to be disappointed that it was parody.
"One of the ads implored viewers, again and again, to see their doctor."
"Ask your doctor if Blorptik is right for you."
Would you really trust a doctor who replied to your interest in Blorptik with "Sure, that sounds like a good idea"? If he thought having you take that medication would help you, wouldn't you think he would have already talked to you about it?
Miebo uses that "Oh yeah" song.
I suppose it's catchier than "Miebo, Not a Dry Eye in the House ."
Without pharma ads, when are we supposed to flip around to check the latest scores?
Why isn't this what RFK Jr. would say and do?
Because nowhere in the fake post do you find the words, "When my father..." or "When my uncle..."
What about those guys who's gift is to be able to say, "Covered in bleeding warts", "uncontrollable spasms" and "literally can't stop shitting" so fast it makes those symptoms sound entirely tolerable? What are they supposed to do?
Count me out. I'm proactive and conscientious about my health, and I want more information about available treatments, not less. It baffles me that people would want to shut themselves off from information and depend more heavily on gatekeepers.
Them what has the money to spend on advertising opens up their pocket books as a matter of choice. But if charties, politicians and USPS can beg, anyone and everyone using non-profit resources can do so as well.
But the need for these strangely named pharmaceutical drugs is not well understood by potential users. Worse, only licensed medical professionals can give access to these potentially dangerous products.
As for RFKJ, he is should stop making raspy sounds and continue whatever time he has left consuming roadkill.
Yeah it's a parody account but I find Big Pharma TV ads to be particularly offensive, predatorial and absurd. I would like to see the data but I don't think they save any lives. What they aim to do is sell you something you don't need all because you woke up with stiffness in your leg or a headache. They feed on older viewers fears about dying and try to sell some drug [at an inflated price] that will apparently help - even though the side effects alone will be just as bad or worse. In most case few people need these drugs. It's Big Pharma taking more money from elderly people or from Medicare.
Pharma advertising is a gross conflict of interest and is a stinking lump of shit in government. Congress could never ban it because it makes them rich.
I think that it would be a good idea to end pharmacutical ads on TV. All they do is get people excited about a new treatment that they don't understand and these people pester their doctors for the new drug. And in many cases, the doctors just give in to their nagging.
If my last doctor is any indicator, physicians everywhere would love for this to be true.
Without getting into details, he'd share stories about patients arguing with him because they saw an ad on TV. Drove him nuts.
Tobacco advertising was ended as a result of a contractual settlement between Big Leaf and the US gov, later supplemented by legislation.
To regulate pharma ads within the First Am., you have to meet the "Central Hudson " test. Under this test, the government may prohibit forms of communication more likely to deceive the public than to inform it, if the prohibition advances a substantial government interest, and is narrowly tailored to advance that interest, i.e., no more extensive than necessary to achieve the government's goal.
Hard to enact an across the board ban on all pharma ads.
I would still allow commercials for hardon pills though. Like the ones with the limp old quarterback throwing the pigskin thru a tire swinging on a rope while his wife smiles off to the side.
^^ The Murdochs are never going to allow a ban on pharmaceutical ads on television. Cancelling ED ads would decrease Fox’s revenue by 90%
In a few years the boomers will be dead and no one will watch TV anymore. The adverts will be on YouTube, tiktok, and X.
Seems perfectly in line with RFK. Also, not a bad idea.
Also, get rid of the sports betting ads on television.
The last twenty years of the 19th Century and first half of the 20th Century was a battle between false medical advertisement claims and the First Amendment. Then came decades of litigation on tobacco and liquor advertising.
Perhaps, if law schools stopped focusing so much hiring, research, and publishing on defending transgender volleyball players, we might gain some useful and informed legislative testimony into drug advertising.
Post a Comment
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 2 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith.