Humira commercials are getting on my nerves

You can consider this a mini-Pit, not a triple-dog-dare Pit, but I’m really getting bugged by Humira commercials. They pronounce the name of the drug, without exception, as Hyu-MEH-ra. OK fine, but if you wanted to pronounce it Hyu-MEH-ra, why did you spell it H-U-M-I-R-A? Because that looks like it should be pronounced Hyu-MEE-ra.

OK, got that off my chest. Feeling better now.

Considering that a monthly dose of the stuff is well over $2000 they probably don’t care how it is pronounced as long as doctors keep prescribing it.

Every time I see those commercials on TV I can’t help but wonder how much that stuff would cost if the ad campaign wasn’t wrapped into the price of a fix.

Agreed (100,000).

Prescription drugs should not be advertised on television, and in fact it’s illegal to do so in every country except New Zealand and the United States.

The first amendment prohibits the government from banning advertisement unless the companies voluntarily agree to do so. Hard alcohol makers voluntarily stopped advertising on TV until 1996.

They can pronounce it however they want as far as I’m concerned.

I just wish that company that makes JibJab or whatever that toe fungus drug is, would STFU about it. And now there’s an alleged pharmacist advising us what toe fungus drug to buy.

Hell, just stop wearing sandals, or amputate, or something.

Is that the commercial with the warning “May cause suicidal thoughts or actions.”? Because holy shit, that’s a red flag.

Isn’t that all of them? It seems like they all go pretty much like, “Talk to your doctor, this drug might kill you, or make you want to kill yourself after you go blind, have a heart attack, stroke, lose all sexual function and bladder control.”

I am not a constitutional lawyer, but … really? We don’t have cigarette ads on TV, and I don’t think that’s due to the voluntary good graces of our tobacco companies.

Again, just my personal rememberies and what-I-recall-reading-some-time-ago, but I don’t think regulation of advertising is necessarily a First Amendment slam-dunk issue. I mean, I’m pretty sure it took action by the FCC or somebody to start allowing drug commercials.

Do not take Humira if you are allergic to Humira.**
You don’t say!?!


That’s Chantix, a stop-smoking drug. Horrible stuff.

Humira is the one that may cause cancers such as lymphoma to occur, right? :confused: So your skin will look nice, and your joints will feel great, but you’re going to die of a nasty cancer.

Well, did you ever see a corpse take a smoke break?

I always like the line “tell your doctor about all your medications”. DUH! Didn’t he prescribe them in the first place?

Honestly, all it takes is one person in the trial that hasn’t smoked in a week saying ‘I feel like I want to kill myself ha ha’ and suddenly ‘suicidal thoughts’ is a side effect. They have to put EVERYTHING into the side effects. I have some drug rep friends that have talked about these things. Someone in the trials eats some crappy tacos and gets gas and flatulence gets listed in the side effects. A few years back one of the trial members walked out into traffic and got killed by a bus and death had to be listed as a side effect. In many of these cases a foot note was added to mention that the company didn’t believe these side effects were related to the drug, but who reads the footnotes?

Some people have multiple doctors. If your GP gives you a muscle relaxer for a spasm, you should probably let him know that your psychiatrist already has you on valium and your dentist gave you some vicodin. Similarly (or better yet), if your ask your urologist for Viagra, he needs to know if your GP has you on blood pressure meds so you, ya know, don’t pass out and fall down the stairs or something.

True enough, but that’s just common sense that when you see a specialist you let your primary know what’s the outcome and what you were prescribed. With EMR, it should be pretty automatic.

Please don’t talk out your ass. But if you insist, show me a TV tobacco ad for Marlboro aired in the US.

Indeed. Probably for another thread, but direct to user advertising in the US for prescription drugs started in the 1970s:

Only two countries as of 2008 allow direct to users advertising (DTCA): the United States and New Zealand.[2] Since the late 1970s, DTCA of prescription drugs has become important in the United States. It takes two main forms: the promotion or creation of a disease out of a non-pathologic physical condition or the promotion of a medication.[2] Many people will inquire about, or even demand a medication they have seen advertised on television.

And, there just could be some connection to the cost of prescription drugs since then.

People do have more than one doctor. And there’s all the mushroom extracts, pig hormones, Ayurvedic heavy metal remedies and other supplements people take without a prescription and don’t bother telling their doctor about.

I suppose that if I had horrible, potentially crippling rheumatoid arthritis, getting it under control via a drug that poses a small risk of lymphoma (an often treatable form of cancer) might seem an attractive option.

I called up Phil Mickelson and he agrees with me.