More handpicked essays just for you.
Persuasive essay techniques higher english
Persuasive techniques in an essay
How to start off a persuasive essay vacation
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
In 2004 Merck was met with serious accusations against the drug known as Vioxx. Vioxx was causing heart complications and increasing the odds of stokes within the patients using the painkiller, in which some cases were fatal. However, according to articles the foremost issue wasn’t Vioxx itself, but rather Merck knew since 2000 that Vioxx possessed these side effects and Merck decided to cover it up for four years, clearly leading to serious public relation issues. Merck was required to preserve the company’s reputation after numerous articles were released, reflecting negatively on Merck’s conduct due to the actions of the Vioxx case. To react to the Vioxx catastrophe, Raymond Gilmartin the company’s CEO, Chairman, and President released two letters titled “For 100 years, patients first” and “An Open Letter from Merck” in attempt to refute allegations over their handling of the drug Vioxx. These open letters try to counter the negative press and regain public trust by using the following three strategies: using the method of building ethos with the audience; emotional appeal to the audience to reestablish confidence with its customers; and emphasizing Merck’s high standard of integrity and the ethical response to the withdrawal of Vioxx. Merck’s letters utilize Aristotle’s idea of building confidence the reader based on some of the fundamentals of ethos: good judgment, and the ability to see beyond their own needs. This strategy is used in attempt to reestablish credibility and refute The Lancet and The Wall Street Journal articles condemning Merck for their unethical actions. The Lancet writer states that Merck and the FDA “acted out of ruthless, shortsighted, and irresponsible self-interest.(Lancet)” Merck answered the allegations with two open letters which establish Merck’s good judgment by always putting the patient first. Merck’s CEO also states that the company performs “extensively studying Vioxx before seeking approval to market it. (Merck OL)” In the previous quote, Gilmartin stresses that the company did its homework before releasing Vioxx. Pursuing this further, to reassure the ethos technique is successful; Gilmartin goes on to say, “Our scientist conduct research in area such as diabetes, Alzheimer’s, and cancer.” This is certainly a statement that is almost certain to target emotions of people Merck’s CEO also displays the company’s long history of the selfless attitude that Merck embraces to help others. Gilmartin validates this through stating, “These actions (pulling Vioxx) are consistent with the actions of putting the patient first, (Merck OL&PF)” “for 100 years Merck has produced life saving benefits (Merck PF)” and “it’s these fundamental priorities that have enabled Merck to bring medicines to people who need them.
Dr. John Abramson’s book Overdosed America debunks the myths about the excellence of American medicine. Abramson backs up this claim by closely examining research about medicine, closely examining the unpublished details submitted by drug manufacturers to the FDA, and discovering that the unpublished data does not coincide with the claims made about the safety and effectiveness of commonly used medicines. Abramsons purpose is to point out the flaws of the pharmaceutical industry in order to warn the readers about the credibility of the drugs they are buying. Given the critical yet technical language of the book, Abramson is writing to an audience that may include academic physicians as well as those who want to learn about the corruption of the pharmaceutical industry.
In Melody Peterson’s “Our Daily Meds” , the history of marketing and advertising in the pharmaceutical industry is explored. The first chapter of the book, entitled “Creating disease”, focuses on how major pharmaceutical companies successfully create new ailments that members of the public believe exist. According to Peterson, the success that these drug manufacturers have experienced can be attributed to the malleability of disease, the use of influencial people to promote new drugs, the marketing behind pills, and the use of media outlets.
"In the past two decades or so, health care has been commercialized as never before, and professionalism in medicine seems to be giving way to entrepreneurialism," commented Arnold S. Relman, professor of medicine and social medicine at Harvard Medical School (Wekesser 66). This statement may have a great deal of bearing on reality. The tangled knot of insurers, physicians, drug companies, and hospitals that we call our health system are not as unselfish and focused on the patients' needs as people would like to think. Pharmaceutical companies are particularly ruthless, many of them spending millions of dollars per year to convince doctors to prescribe their drugs and to convince consumers that their specific brand of drug is needed in order to cure their ailments. For instance, they may present symptoms that are perfectly harmless, and lead potential citizens to believe that, because of these symptoms, they are "sick" and in need of medication. In some instances, the pharmaceutical industry in the United States misleads both the public and medical professionals by participating in acts of both deceptive marketing practices and bribery, and therefore does not act within the best interests of the consumers.
In 1906, the Pure Food and Drug Act, that was years in the making was finally passed under President Roosevelt. This law reflected a sea change in medicine-- an unprecedented wave of regulations. No longer could drug companies have a secret formula and hide potentially toxic substances such as heroin under their patent. The law required drug companies to specify the ingredients of medications on the label. It also regulated the purity and dosage of substances. Not by mere coincidence was the law passed only about five years after Bayer, a German based drug company began selling the morphine derivative, heroin. Thought to be a safe, non-habit forming alternative to morphine, heroin quickly became the “cure-all drug” that was used to treat anything from coughs to restlessness. Yet, just as quickly as it became a household staple, many began to question the innocence of the substance. While the 1906 law had inherent weaknesses, it signaled the beginning of the end for “cure-all” drugs, such as opiate-filled “soothing syrups” that were used for infants. By tracing and evaluating various reports by doctors and investigative journalists on the medical use of heroin, it is clear that the desire for this legislative measure developed from an offshoot in the medical community-- a transformation that took doctors out from behind the curtain, and brought the public into a new era of awareness.
...pecially with the use of DTC advertising, to such a wide range of afflictions greatly increased their consumer base, but one of them proved to be deadly. In 1999, four years after Lilly sent study results to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration showing Zyprexa didn’t alleviate dementia symptoms in older patients, it began marketing the drug to those very people, according to documents unsealed in insurer suits against the company for overpayment.(Applbaum, 248). Soon after it began to be used in those suffering from dementia, there were studies produces that showed an increase in death rate among elderly patients taking Zyprexa. In January of 2009, Eli Lilly and Company, who produced the drug, ended up settling the lawsuit and agreed to pay $1.415 billion which was one of the biggest corporate settlements in the history of pharmaceutical companies (Applbaum, 237).
In Melody Peterson’s “Our Daily Meds” , the history of marketing and advertising in the pharmaceutical industry is explored. The first chapter of the book, entitled “Creating disease”, focuses on how major pharmaceutical companies successfully create new ailments that members of the public believe exist. According to Peterson, the success that these drug manufacturers have experienced can be attributed to the malleability of disease, the use of influencial people to promote new drugs and the efficient usage of media outlets.
Confronted with two failed methodologies, Merck then falsified the test data to guarantee the results it desired. Having achieved the desired efficacy threshold, Merck submitted these fraudulent results to the FDA and European Medicines Agency. Merck attempted to cover up their fraudulent testing actions by destroying evidence of the falsified data and then lying to an FDA investigator. Merck also attempted to bribe the team on the MMRII testing process with financial incentives to cooperate and remain silent about the fraudulent activities and testing taking place. Merck went as far as to threaten Stephen Krahling with jail if he reported fraud to the FDA. Clearly, Merck’s purposes are corrupted and its actions of manipulating science distained its very mission of making the public healthier. Merck is doing the exact opposite of what its company’s objective is to do, it is putting young children and the public’s health at risk, all for the objective of continuous profit, reputation, power, influence, and maintaining its precious license to continue to distribute this vaccine. Thus, Merck’s actions and behaviors are unethical for defrauding the FDA and European Medicines
In August of 2001 Robert Ray Courtney was arrested in Kansas City, Missouri and charged with diluting drugs used to treat cancer patients. Courtney’s actions not only violated criminal and civil laws but they shattered the ethical code and the oath he took as a licensed pharmacist. His actions left many people wondering why anyone would commit such a horrible act, let alone a trusted pharmacist who was providing medication to patients whose very lives depended on him doing his job.
In the text, “Vaccines Cause Children More Adverse Reactions Than Any other Drug”, the author Dr. Mercola states his personal opinion as well as other doctors opinions are findings to help his research. The authors’ purpose is to inform the reader how vaccines are causing adverse reactions around the world. The author uses ethos throughout the piece because everyone he speaks with is a doctor, as well as him. His ethos makes the piece very informational and helpful to a parent reading who is concerned about vaccinating their kids. Dr. Mercola uses pathos by explaining all the harm vaccinations are doing, such as serious reactions and death. The piece has many logos informing readers’ studies being done on vaccinations, “based on reported pediatric
Many people throughout the world visit the United States every year to receive medical treatment. This is due to our excellent pharmaceutical industry as it spends million of dollars and many hours of research to come up with what we can only describe as “miracle” drugs and treatments. Part of the success of many of these medications is because the pharmaceutical industry is highly regulated by policies that protect the public from accessing drugs that have not been fully tested and found to be “safe”. However, this was not the case until the late 1990s and early 2000s. One time in history that highly influenced the strict regulations we currently have was the nationwide contamination of patients through blood transfusion or by consuming medications
Since its humble beginning as a small drugstore, Merck has placed a large amount of importance on improving the health and well-being of its customers. As drug patents expire and genetic forms of their top products become available, Merck’s strategy is to do the unexpected; instead of raising the price of their older products in favor of patent protected new drugs, Merck focuses on reducing their cost in order to better compete with their generic counterparts. Additionally, Merck’s plan for growth now encompasses a much more aggressive pursuit of new drugs in their pipeline through extensive research. Merck became the second largest health care company in the world after the merger with Schering-Plough in 2009 and has contributed great discoveries like the first cervical cancer vaccine and great resources like the Merck Manuals which are utilized as a source of information to doctors, scientists and consumers worldwide .
Marketers operating in the drug industry have to push their products which then raises the ethical questions that surround the profession of medical delivery. Pharmaceutical companies disburse billions of dollars annually to research, develop, and market drugs. Every pharmacy company needs the endorsement of their drugs from physicians and doctors, so they have to ensure that the doctors are well treated. According to the Pew Charitable Trust, the pharmaceutical corporation spent over $27 billion on advertising alone in 2012, with $24 billion of that dedicated to marketing to physicians. (Kessel, 2014) A further survey conducted by Deloitte shows that 35% of the doctors accept some gratuity payment from the pharmacy companies and 16% of the doctors take money to represent the pharmacy company in conferences and health camps. (Kessel, 2014) The Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education declares that pharmaceutical and medical equipment companies funded almost one-third of continuing medical education (CME) opportunities for doctors in 2011.( (Barnett, 1989)
Tylenol's 1982 ordeal has become a classic example of a successful crisis management. Johnson & Johnson faced a major crisis when their leading pain-killer medicine, extra-strength Tylenol, was found to have caused the fatalities of seven people in Chicago, Illinois. It was reported that unknown suspect or suspects took the product off store shelves, tampered it with deadly cyanide and returned to the shelves. As a result, seven people died and consumers lost confidence and panicked over hearing the news of this incident. Tylenol received massive media coverage which led to an expeditious communication of event to the public. Johnson & Johnson (J & J) took a huge financial hit when it had to recall and destroy approximately $100 million dollars worth of inventory in addition to the loss incurred by the company when the public reacted to the incident (Campbell et. al., n.d.). Tylenol's approach was to pull off the products as quickly as possible, stopped production, cooperated with the investigation and the media and halted all forms of advertisement or marketing of the product. Furthermore, Johnson's & Johnson's took the initiative to protect and improve their product packaging which allowed them to regain the public's confidence and paved the way for improved tamper-resistant packaging now used by myriad of manufacturing companies. The fatalities occurred between September 29th to October 1st of the year 1982 and by November, Tylenol had already reintroduced the product with improved tamper-resistant packaging. To regain the public's attention and confidence, Johnson's & Johnson's launched a dynamic marketing campaign to put the product's name before the public.
The case under analysis, Eli Lilly & Company, will be covering the positives and negatives with regards to the business situation and strategy of Eli Lilly. One of the major pharmaceutical and health care companies in its industry, Lilly focused its efforts on the areas of "drug research, development, and marketed to the following areas: neuroscience, endocrinology, oncology, cardiovascular disease, and women's health." Having made a strong comeback in the 1990's due to its remarkably successful antidepressant Prozac, was now facing a potential loss in profits with its patent soon to expire. The problem was not only the soon to expire patent on Prozac, but the fact that Prozac accounted for as much as 30% of total revenue was the reality Eli Lilly now faced. (Pearce & Robinson, 34-1)
Research, Vioxx Tragedy Spotlights Failure of Animal. Dü. Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine. tarih yok.