<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xml:base="http://harvardscience.harvard.edu" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<channel>
 <title>all Michael Law stories</title>
 <link>http://harvardscience.harvard.edu/stories/person/5918</link>
 <description>Stories and external links referencing a person (RSS)</description>
 <language>en</language>
<item>
 <title>Value of direct-to-consumer drug advertising oversold, study finds</title>
 <link>http://harvardscience.harvard.edu/animal-vegetable-mineral/articles/value-direct-consumer-drug-advertising-oversold-study-finds</link>
 <description>&lt;!--paging_filter--&gt;&lt;p&gt;Direct-to-consumer advertising may not be giving big pharma such a big bang for their five billion bucks after all. Despite the billions spent on bringing drug marketing campaigns straight into patients’ living rooms, such strategies have a modest effect at best—and in some cases, no effect at all.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;“People tend to think that if direct-to-consumer advertising wasn’t effective, pharma wouldn’t be doing it,” says Harvard Medical School professor &lt;a title=&quot;&quot; href=&quot;http://harvardscience.harvard.edu/directory/researchers/stephen-soumerai&quot;&gt;Stephen Soumerai&lt;/a&gt;, principal investigator on the study. “But as it turns out, decisions to market directly to consumers is based on scant data.”&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://harvardscience.harvard.edu/animal-vegetable-mineral/articles/value-direct-consumer-drug-advertising-oversold-study-finds&quot;&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <pubDate>Tue, 02 Sep 2008 13:00:58 -0400</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>404132862</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">20386 at http://harvardscience.harvard.edu</guid>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
