DTC ads are used in New Zealand and the United States. Direct-to-consumer advertising is used to inform patients who are already suffering from disease and raises awareness of treatment options. While DTC ads intend to serve a great purpose, the reliability and credibility of these ads is questionable. These ads are driven to influence choice rather than inform patients. Therefore, these ads relay information that pushes patients to favor the use of these drugs. For example, patients see advertisements on television regarding psoriasis and a treatable medicine for it. A suffering patient may then go to their doctor and deliberately ask for that medicine by name. When this happens these patients aren’t considering the risk factors that may come with the drug because of the claims suggested by the DTC ad. All of which is something I think needs to change. When I sometimes hear these ads I do engage, as I am a patient suffering from psoriasis. However, I am not influenced by my decision to medicate in order to “cure” it. DTC ads target the vulnerable and ill informed. I feel that this practice should be modified because it is false advertising. As for coming up with an acceptable public health solution I think we all play a part. Doctors should further inform these suffering patients, patients should acquire information about the drug before jumping the gun, drug or pharmaceutical companies should be focused on helping suffering individuals not profiting on them and society as a whole needs to be better about producing advertisements that don’t speak to its individuals as vulnerable consumers.
After visiting the Washington state’s agency website I was a bit overwhelmed with how much information and resources are available. As an uninformed consumer I found that the Latest News regarding Aging and Long-Term Support Administration helpful because it is important to know current news in order to make the best and informed decisions for their loved ones. The navigation through the website is also very helpful because if you have particular questions regarding something in specific you can find a direct link to it. After the Latest News it jumps right into What We Do, which I think is a great way to elude into the next information most important to consumers to make informed decisions. Though I think the Latest News section is helpful, it could very well be less helpful and lead to more questions. However, there are hyperlinks attached to everything that one may wonder. I would suggest people to look further at these links.11
After reading Americans’ love of snacks has spread far beyond that bag of chips the definition of snacking is more than just a term used for food. According to this article the term snacking refers to not only our consumption of light eating, but also our consumption of light breaking of social media, reading, or distracting us from necessary things to be done. The information is not so much concerning, but it is definitely an eye-opening concept that expands our understanding of snacking. If people were less well informed than me they would probably argue that snacking is better than eating large meals, which happens to be a misconception of snacking. Though this argument is obviously not valid as snacking leads us to intake less calories in small intervals and metabolize it quickly.
After reading Obesity and Other Health Concerns Lead Food Companies to Step Up Health and Nutrient Claims it is shocking to only now know how and why a “healthy lifestyle” is marketed. As a consumer this information is important to know and consider because we make choices every day that are influenced by labels and marketing. As the article explains there are numerous regulations to food labeling and what comes with those regulations. Since these regulations are implemented more and more companies are capitalizing on the regulations by mentioning things like organic, vegan, etc. regardless of the amount that product truly contains. We live in a health craze society and things like this make it easy for us to simply select certain foods by just labels. For the less well informed they may argue that companies have to include everything on labels, which is absolutely true. Though the danger in this argument is that companies are required to include all a products contents even the slightest amount. So when you see “organic” or “less calories” or any other labels plastered on the front of a product, how much that product adheres to this label could be a tiniest amount.
After reading Poll says majority of Americans support menu labeling it is quite surprising that more than 50% of people want to have their meals or food labeled in restaurants. I find this more surprising for fast food restaurants than other types of restaurants because fast food is just that, FAST FOOD. The expectation of their food is obviously greater in calories than others. However, it is good to allow consumers to make informed choices of which meal is better off for them than others by disclosing all information. For the less informed I would expect the argument that we are better off having menu labels than not having them. I would expect that some consumers would be surprised with the amount of people who prefer labels to not.