Every month, the postman leaves a stack of psychiatric journals and magazines for me. (I still don’t understand how these companies obtained my mailing address.) These publications are fondly referred to as “throw away journals” because, well, people throw them away—often without reading them.
I am one of those people. (I have also tried to get off of the mailing list, but my efforts have failed.)
These publications boast a ridiculous amount of advertising. The content within is also of limited utility—because you get what you pay for.
Let’s dissect the anatomy of the January 2007 issue of Psychiatric Times, in order, from page 1 through page 72:
- generic Lilly ad - 1 page
- Lunesta (Sepracor) - 4 pages
- generic Pfizer insert - 2
- board licensing preparation ad - 1
- ADHD education (Shire) - 2
- Lexapro insert (Forest) - 2
- generic Janssen ad - 1
- Adderall XR (Shire) - 3
- psychosis symposia announcement - 1
- Effexor XR (Wyeth) - 4
- ADHD prodrug development (Shire) - 2
- Abilify (Bristol-Myers Squibb) insert - 8
- Rozerem (Takeda) - 3
- Geodon (Pfizer) - 2
- Namenda (Forest) - 4
- Cymbalta (Lilly) - 2
- Seroquel (AstraZeneca) - 4
- electronic medical record ad - 1
- Zyprexa (Lilly) - 1
- physician staffing opportunities - 2
- classifieds - 11
- generic Janssen ad (back cover) - 1
Over half of this publication (37 pages, or 51.4%) is dedicated to advertising, the vast majority of which is for medications. That doesn’t even include the inserts (which resemble the perfume ads that jut out in popular magazines). Only 3 (or 4.2%) of those ads are unrelated to pharmaceutical companies.
In the lower left-hand corner of page 3 is a box of text:
Psychiatric Times serves as an impartial forum for information affecting mental health care professionals and their practices….
“Impartial”? Ha!
People who work in mental health would like to believe that they have the best understanding of human psychology and behavior, but, in truth, people in marketing and advertising likely know a lot more than we do.
4 Feb 2007 |
amazing isn’t it? and the ads are merely wrapper for the unskeptical reporting in the pages of psych times.
Comment by Philip Dawdy | 4 Feb 2007 @ 2:36pm
I’m glad you are still writing… but I was only at 2003 when it all disappeared!!
Comment by rach | 4 Feb 2007 @ 4:00pm
Hi Maria,
I’m glad your’e still here, for my own selfish reasons that I enjoy reading what you write. You have inspired me to want to lindy hop. That hasn’t happened so far, but my daughter and I have found a contra dance to go to, which has been delightful.
I’m a librarian in a medical school library, aspiring to know a lot more about the med part to go with the library part. When times are slow, I read the reference books, but its not the same as listening to real people. I love being a fly on the wall, so to speak, as you talk about your own experiences. May you do well, whatever you decide to do.
Barbara
Comment by barbara slavinski | 4 Feb 2007 @ 5:45pm
I get JAMA every week and I don’t want it. I got scammed first year so that I could get a “free” Stedman’s. I hear ya. Too much advertising too, I agree!
theanonymousmedicalstudent.blogspot.com
Comment by Cliff Stanzler | 4 Feb 2007 @ 7:46pm
The worst part about throw away journals is the quality of the writing, that’s why they get thrown away.
The official journal of and American Academy of Neurology, Neurology, has ads throughout the issues, in between articles, and they’re printed on stiffer paper, so as you leaf through with your thumb the ads pop up as your thumb stops that thicker paper. Frequently there also seems to be a curious location of these interspersed ads, so that one for an anticonvulsant ends up next to an article about epilepsy.
I think it’s a sad state of affairs.
Comment by Greg P | 4 Feb 2007 @ 8:16pm
I think (and hope fervently) that most doctors are smarter than the throw aways. Unfortunately, the “magazines” often find themselves in the waiting rooms for the psychiatrists. This leads to patients who often come in asking for a new drug that they are just sure will make them “better”. It doesn’t matter what the drug is designed to do, if it is new, everyone wants it. I have seen doctors try to explain the inappropriateness of a drug to a individual and have that individual leave the office unhappy and complaining that the “doctor just doesn’t listen to me”. As the social worker, I often get to explain why the doctor makes the decisions she does because the doctor often does not have the time.
And by the way, change is often difficult but always a learning experience. I look forward to whatever intueri becomes. I always come away from reading it wanting it to share it with someone that I think will appreciate your thoughts.
Comment by donna lee | 4 Feb 2007 @ 9:51pm
The ads are ridiculous! My partner gets a monthly mag for registered polysomnographic technologists…it’s a great resource for her. Lots of info about conferences, new equipment reviews, upcoming CE approved classes etc. Why are there pharmaceutical ads in it? RBPSGT’s can not prescribe! The sleep med doc’s (at least the one she works for) get other journals etc…so what is the purpose of putting these ads in a mag that isn’t for the doc OR the patient?!? It just makes no sense.
While I am ranting…can anyone tell me why I have to be bombarded with scrub ads on nursing blogs? I really hate that! I KNOW where and how to get scrubs, and the hospitals around here have specific scrubs they require that designate what department a nurse or care partner works in! So choosing “cute” scrubs isn’t even an option!
Ok…rant over. :P
Comment by Fallen Angels | 5 Feb 2007 @ 7:27am
Some cross-disciplinary and multicultural statistics for your perusal.
The February edition of Australian Pharmacist
Front Cover: ooh actually doesn’t appear to be sponsored by anyone (the Australian Journal of Pharmacy can rarely/never boast this)
Inside front cover: full page ad for Caduet (Norvasc + Lipitor)
101-105: Australian Pharmaceutical Society Propaganda News.
105: half page ad for ear wax drops (Key Pharmaceuticals). And new DIY ear syringe.
106: article about a magazine on the history of pharmacy in Australia (is it just me or does that seem like a rather limited scope for a regular publication??)
107: full page ad for Avandia (Glaxo)
108-9: careers in pharmacy
109: Small ad at the bottom for Avandia AGAIN
110-11: more on careers in pharmacy, with a novel placement of a Celebrex (Pfizer) ad spanning both pages, surrounded by text.
112-116: more about careers in pharmacy. No ads!
113-122: more PSA news, small PSA propaganda ad at the bottom of two pages (preaching to the converted people! Everyone who gets this journal is already a member)
123: article about ethical pharmaceuticals. Interesting.
124-128: More stuff about PSA state divisions. And a one page article on diclofenac (anti-inflammatory or anticancer? Ooh it appears that sun damage and actinic keratoses have been linked to increase prostaglandin levels in exposed skin… hence… hmmm I’m not sold. Well anyway, I’ll have to read the full article)
129: full page ad for Crestor (AstraZeneca)
130-135: article on different models for pharmacist prescribing. And a half page ad for a PSA conference on the sunny Central Coast of NSW.
136: full page ad for Panadol Infant Drops. Suitable from one month of age. “Because it’s my choice”. Thanks Glaxo.
137-149: Continuing Professional Development section. This month we’re learning about osteoporosis; educational visiting (oh it seems to be about visiting DOCTORS and telling them what they already know… visiting patients is much more fun. They sometimes give me cups of tea and the chocolate biscuits that they hide when their doctor visits), cerebellar ataxia (can result from amiodarone use); small ad for Celebrex underneath Mrs Cerebellar Ataxia… and finally Paget’s disease of the bone;.
150: 2007 Conferences.
151: book reviews. MCQs in Pharmacy Practice, Further MCQs in Pharmacy Practice. Then a list of other titles of interest. Why are they interesting? It doesn’t say?
152-161: Clinical update on Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus. This is quite thorough and useful information.
157: Full page ad for the new blood glucose meter from Roche…
162: Cyberpharm- The modern Cone of Silence. I have no idea what this is about. But it’s not an ad.
163: An ad titled “Arthritis Treatment in the media spotlight”. Cunningly disguised as an article. This is an ad from Glaxo (Celebrex) telling the world that Celebrex is good, Vioxx was evil, NSAIDs are all evil, weigh up risks and benefits yadayadayada
164-165: The complementary and herbal medicines pages. This month we learn about ginger and pigface.
166-168: Pharmacy services in Norway.
169: ooh I think this is my favourite ad so far. Did you know that injections are one of the most painful medical procedures? Well yes they are. More painful than a liver biopsy, a lung transplant, debriding extensive burns, removing a splinter with a pair of nail clippers (a patient tried that a few weeks ago… I don’t recommend it). So you should recommend EMLA cream to all your patients who might need a needle. Which is all of them. And at only $20 for a 5g tube, why not get them as birthday presents too?
170: research news. Diabetes drug trials, pain relieving snails, a biobank project in the UK and enoxaparin wooping unfractionated heparin in preventing venous thromboembolism.
171-172: summaries of winning presentations from a recent conference. I’m sorry, I know that it’s technically true, but I don’t like the use of data as plural in the form “there are little data:. It just looks wrong.
172: Half page ad encouraging me to Join the Pharmacy History Academy NOW!
173-174: pseudoephedrine code of practice
175: Propaganda. Celebrate 150 years of pharmacy in Australia. Sponsored by Alphapharm, Pharmaceutical Defence Limited and PSA
176: National Prescribing Service (independent body promoting quality use of medicines) article on opioid analgesics.
177: ad, again cunningly disguised as an article, proclaiming new hope for dry skin. I can feel my itches disappear just gazing upon the ever so natural oats that will make me all soft and smooth.
178-80: Product news. Avandamet (surely GSK have had enough paid advertising in this episode already?), Actifed (Pfizer), Fosamax and Alendro (now subsidised for high risk patients who haven’t had falls. Now that IS good news), Vaxigrip (whatever that is), Somac paid ad (trying to look like another part of the actual news), Nexavar, Tykerb amd Ultralite. Then a half page ad for Hertz rental cars.
Inside back cover: ad for an upcoming conference in Madrid.
Back cover: ad for Zaditen eye drops (now available over the counter! But it’s still prescription strength! And look how miserable the patient looks, with tears running down her face and the poor pharmacist looks so helpless in assuaging her distress! But there’s hope!)
This journal is not too bad in terms of ad pages vs real pages. However an awful lot of the non-ad pages are fairly useless. And I must admit that I was seriously thinking about recommending Zaditen for the next patient who comes in with itchy eyes. But where is the information to say that it’s more effective and well tolerated than Livostin or Antistine Privine or Naphcon? Or oral antihistamines?
I see your point.
Comment by yay | 5 Feb 2007 @ 8:52pm
Please keep ‘ablogging along,’ I love getting your view of life here.
All those poor advertising folks…the door to door salesman, the phone callers you can’t understand (or the talking computers), and the snake oil salesmen…all banished to free magazines and the internet…where do they hold their pity parties?
Comment by mary | 5 Feb 2007 @ 11:58pm
I’ve composed a letter to you, but I don’t know how to reach you by way of email. Is my email address registered in a way that you can contact me?
Carol
Comstock Park, MI
Comment by Carol | 6 Feb 2007 @ 9:51am
If you dislike DTC advertising as much as you dislike those throw-away journals — calling them garbage would insult compost heaps the world over — you may like this Lunesta not-quite-ad. Well, you probably have seen it before, but mayhap one or two of your readers have not:
http://video.google.com/googleplayer.swf?docId=-8973286755592536430&hl=en-CA
Cheers,
Felix.
Comment by Felix Kasza | 6 Feb 2007 @ 3:16pm