<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: AstraZeneca Wants FDA To Review TV Ads</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/04/astrazeneca-wants-fda-to-review-tv-ads/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/04/astrazeneca-wants-fda-to-review-tv-ads/</link>
	<description>News, Comment and Conversation</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 18:03:10 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Matty</title>
		<link>http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/04/astrazeneca-wants-fda-to-review-tv-ads/#comment-319621</link>
		<dc:creator>Matty</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Apr 2008 16:26:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/04/astrazeneca-wants-fda-to-review-tv-ads/#comment-319621</guid>
		<description>Pure PR gamesmanship!!  AZ has never had the reputation for being an angel in the world of Big Pharma, particularly evident by the recent fiasco over their marketing and sales tactics in the oncology area.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Pure PR gamesmanship!!  AZ has never had the reputation for being an angel in the world of Big Pharma, particularly evident by the recent fiasco over their marketing and sales tactics in the oncology area.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jack2</title>
		<link>http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/04/astrazeneca-wants-fda-to-review-tv-ads/#comment-319289</link>
		<dc:creator>Jack2</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Apr 2008 13:05:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/04/astrazeneca-wants-fda-to-review-tv-ads/#comment-319289</guid>
		<description>I think AZ would be quite happy to get its ads reviewed, to reduce the risk of a lawsuit down the line. Whether they pay the reviewer (in the form of a fee), or the FDA/tax payer pays for the review through increased funding isn't as important to them as getting the ad reviewed.  They just want the thing reviewed. 

Typical PR fluff?  The industry spent money lobbying for this last year.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think AZ would be quite happy to get its ads reviewed, to reduce the risk of a lawsuit down the line. Whether they pay the reviewer (in the form of a fee), or the FDA/tax payer pays for the review through increased funding isn&#8217;t as important to them as getting the ad reviewed.  They just want the thing reviewed. </p>
<p>Typical PR fluff?  The industry spent money lobbying for this last year.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nathan</title>
		<link>http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/04/astrazeneca-wants-fda-to-review-tv-ads/#comment-314709</link>
		<dc:creator>Nathan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Apr 2008 22:14:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/04/astrazeneca-wants-fda-to-review-tv-ads/#comment-314709</guid>
		<description>Skeptic,
It's rather funny that pharma catches so much flack from people like you when we do the "wrong" thing.  But now that a company is standing up for what is right, you portray as "PR fluf".  We just can't win in this business.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Skeptic,<br />
It&#8217;s rather funny that pharma catches so much flack from people like you when we do the &#8220;wrong&#8221; thing.  But now that a company is standing up for what is right, you portray as &#8220;PR fluf&#8221;.  We just can&#8217;t win in this business.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Skeptic</title>
		<link>http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/04/astrazeneca-wants-fda-to-review-tv-ads/#comment-314585</link>
		<dc:creator>Skeptic</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Apr 2008 20:53:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/04/astrazeneca-wants-fda-to-review-tv-ads/#comment-314585</guid>
		<description>A fairly transparent and disingenuous attempt to take the high road by encouraging the funding of an program that has zero chance of happening.  PR fluff</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A fairly transparent and disingenuous attempt to take the high road by encouraging the funding of an program that has zero chance of happening.  PR fluff</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic Page Served (once) in 0.156 seconds -->

