 |
|
Liability for Adverse Events in Direct-to-Consumer Advertising
|
|
| Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings. |
|
|
|
To the Editor: We agree with Dr Mello and colleagues1 that there is no inherent incompatibility between DTCA of prescription drugs and the ongoing application in product liability litigation of the so-called learned intermediary doctrine. We believe that DTCA empowers patients with information to help them engage in a meaningful dialogue with their physicians about the benefits and risks of prescription drug therapy. At the same, it is the physician who, based on a drug's operational labeling (ie, the package insert) and knowledge about the patient, is in the best position to communicate relevant risk information, and it is the physician who has the ultimate responsibility for the prescribing decision. In this respect, we believe that DTCA supports, and does not erode, the prescribing physician's role in the patient-physician relationship.
We also agree with Mello et al that the free speech guarantee in the First Amendment, as interpreted by the . . . [Full Text of this Article]
 CiteULike  Connotea  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Technorati  Twitter
What's this?
RELATED ARTICLES
Liability for Adverse Events in Direct-to-Consumer Advertising
David Shein
JAMA. 2003;289(20):2646.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Liability for Adverse Events in Direct-to-Consumer Advertising—Reply
Michelle M. Mello, Meredith B. Rosenthal, and Peter J. Neumann
JAMA. 2003;289(20):2647.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Direct-to-Consumer Advertising and Shared Liability for Pharmaceutical Manufacturers
Michelle M. Mello, Meredith Rosenthal, and Peter J. Neumann
JAMA. 2003;289(4):477-481.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
|
