- Assistant Professor of School of Population and Public Health at the University of British Columbia
- Con to the question "Should Prescription Drugs Be Advertised Directly to Consumers?"
“Direct-to-consumer prescription drug advertising can cause damage by instigating rapid, widespread stimulation of use of new drugs before harmful effects are fully known.
Advertisements exaggerate treatment benefits and use emotive messages to target people with milder health problems, many of whom are unlikely to benefit from the drugs advertised.
Advertising leads to higher drug costs and overall health care costs through substitution of new, expensive drugs without treatment advantages.”
“Should Canada Allow Direct-to-Consumer Advertising of Prescription Drugs? NO,” cfp.ca, Feb. 2009
- Involvement and Affiliations:
- Member, Health Action International (HAI-Europe) Board of Directors, 2013-2016
- Consultant, Health Action International, 1996-present
- Michael Smith Foundation for Health Research Scholar 2008-2014
- Assistant Professor, School of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia
- Clinical Evidence Review Consultant, British Columbia Ministry of Health
- Faculty Associate, Pharmaceutical Policy Unit at University of British Columbia’s Centre for Health Services and Policy Research
- Member, Steering Group of Women and Health Protection
- Staff Member, Health Action International, 1991-1996
- Former Visiting Scholar, Centre for Values, Ethics & Law in Medicine, Central Clinical School, University of Sydney, Australia
- Former Model Curriculum Developer, Health Action International/World Health International
- PhD, Health Care and Epidemiology, University of British Columbia
- BA, Geography, Simon Fraser University
- None found
- Quoted in:
- Pro & Con Quotes: Should Prescription Drugs Be Advertised Directly to Consumers?