Your donations pay for the CIH Forum hosting and software.
Please help the CIH Forums by disabling AdBlock Plus on this page.
Forum Home Forum Home :: The Message Board :: Commercials You Hate !!!!!
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Gardasil "Parent Shaming" Ads
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Gardasil "Parent Shaming" Ads

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123>
Author
Message
Redheaded Gigi View Drop Down
Commercial Hater
Commercial Hater


Joined: 16 Aug 2016
Location: MD
Status: Offline
Points: 22
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote Redheaded Gigi Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Gardasil "Parent Shaming" Ads
    Posted: 16 Aug 2016 at 9:34pm
Newbie here.  I'm hating on these relatively new Gardasil ads that shame parents over not getting their kids the vaccine.  While I'm not anti-vax by any means, I am somewhat suspicious when Merck tries to shame me into giving my kids their vaccine.

https://www.ispot.tv/ad/Ap1V/merck-hpv-vaccination
Back to Top
Sponsored Links



Back to Top
TheNilvarg View Drop Down
Junior Executive
Junior Executive


Joined: 06 Feb 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 359
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote TheNilvarg Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 Aug 2016 at 5:16am
Good, people who refuse to vaccinate should be publicly shamed.
Back to Top
MrTim View Drop Down
Junior Executive
Junior Executive
Avatar

Joined: 15 Apr 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 6930
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote MrTim Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 Aug 2016 at 5:51am
"We're Merck, and we think your daughters are sluts, so they need to be HPV vaccinated RIGHT NOW!"
Shocked
Back to Top
Papa Lazarou View Drop Down
Ad Exec
Ad Exec
Avatar
Formerly Codtaro

Joined: 18 Nov 2011
Location: New Mexico
Status: Offline
Points: 7720
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (2) Thanks(2)   Quote Papa Lazarou Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 Aug 2016 at 6:47am
I personally don't see what's wrong with shaming retards who think some blonde slut and a proven liar know better than the entirety of the medical and scientific community.

As for "sluts", I think it's pretty much been irrefutably proven that the ridiculous concept of 'abstinence' doesn't work, and in fact has been leading to more problems due to proponents of abstinence thinking that the best way to enforce it is via enforced sexual ignorance. Now, until we get our heads out of the proverbial sand and start enforcing mandatory no-exceptions sex education starting at a young age - a method that has been proven to reduce the risks of pregnancy and STD among teens in other countries - then there's no reason to leave things up to idiots who think "My little angel is better than all the rest and would never have any sex without my permission".

Anyway, while there's not enough research for solid statistical likelihood, evidence has already shown that HPV can be passed orally - not just from oral sex but even kissing. So even the "good little virgins" aren't 'safe'.

Simply no reason to NOT get the vaccine unless you have some kind of immunodeficiency problem. Every single person who willingly or willingly-by-proxy elects out of getting vaccinated produces the risk of passing it to those who cannot be vaccinated, or giving it the environment in which to mutate in a way that makes the vaccine ineffective.
Banana!
BANANA!!
BANANA!!!
BANANA!!
Banana!
Back to Top
the raytownian View Drop Down
Junior Executive
Junior Executive
Avatar

Joined: 07 Nov 2009
Location: huntsville
Status: Offline
Points: 237
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote the raytownian Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 Aug 2016 at 7:12pm
Originally posted by Redheaded Gigi Redheaded Gigi wrote:

While I'm not anti-vax by any means, I am somewhat suspicious when Merck tries to shame me into giving my kids their vaccine.

Same here. I don't even have kids, and I am in no way sympathetic to the whole anti-vaccine movement, but I just love how pharmaceutical companies try to push drugs by manipulating people's fears and emotions, as if I'm supposed to believe they have any concerns other than making money. They really have no shame.
Back to Top
cheesenado View Drop Down
Commercial Hater
Commercial Hater
Avatar

Joined: 19 Dec 2014
Location: Virginia
Status: Offline
Points: 48
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote cheesenado Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Aug 2016 at 12:40am
Originally posted by Papa Lazarou Papa Lazarou wrote:

 Anyway, while there's not enough research for solid statistical likelihood, evidence has already shown that HPV can be passed orally - not just from oral sex but even kissing. So even the "good little virgins" aren't 'safe'.

Yes. If the vaccine gives young gals and guys protection from developing cancer in the future, why is that a bad thing? Those with HPV may not show any signs or symptoms, and by the someone knows that they have HPV, it could be years after having an encounter with an infected person.
Back to Top
Redheaded Gigi View Drop Down
Commercial Hater
Commercial Hater


Joined: 16 Aug 2016
Location: MD
Status: Offline
Points: 22
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Redheaded Gigi Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Aug 2016 at 2:32am
That's my entire problem with the commercial.  If it were a CDC commercial, I'd have a different view; but I don't need Merck to guilt me into getting my kid vaxed so they can make a gazillion dollars.
Back to Top
Redheaded Gigi View Drop Down
Commercial Hater
Commercial Hater


Joined: 16 Aug 2016
Location: MD
Status: Offline
Points: 22
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Redheaded Gigi Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Aug 2016 at 2:42am
Not everyone who is wary of this particular vaccine is a "retard", listens to Jenny McCarthy, and/or believes that their child won't engage in sexual activity.  In my own particular case, I have two children with Crohn's disease who receive Remicade infusions and given that we have no family history of Crohn's and there's very little understanding about what causes the disease or induces a flare, I'm wary of just about anything my children put into their bodies.  While they and their brother, who does not have Crohn's, are receiving the Gardasil, I don't need Merck to try to "guilt" me into doing anything.  There have been enough imperfect, potentially guilt-inducing choices to be made with Crohn's treatment to last me a lifetime.  Also, I don't think Merck gives a flying f**k if my kids or if anyone else's kids get HPV or HPV-related cancers; their concern is all about the company's profits. 
Back to Top
Thor View Drop Down
Revolutionary
Revolutionary
Avatar

Joined: 16 Apr 2008
Location: Rockaway, NJ
Status: Offline
Points: 56573
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote Thor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Aug 2016 at 9:10am
Expecting Merck to care about our health is like expecting the supermarket to care that we're out of bread and milk.  They're businesses.  They're not there to care; they're there to fulfill a need and to make profits.
 
 
Back to Top
Jimbo View Drop Down
Honor Roll
Honor Roll
Avatar

Joined: 19 Apr 2008
Location: Florida
Status: Offline
Points: 45934
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Jimbo Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Aug 2016 at 2:49pm
Originally posted by Thor Thor wrote:

Expecting Merck to care about our health is like expecting the supermarket to care that we're out of bread and milk.  They're businesses.  They're not there to care; they're there to fulfill a need and to make profits.


Cannot agree with that. If all they are interested in is profits and don't CARE about the people who use their products, then they should get out of the Health CARE business.

Note the word CARE in the title.

It's called the Health CARE industry, not the Health Profit Generating industry for a reason.

If all they're interested in is profits, they should become a Hedge Fund management company, or manufacture industrial solvents or something.

Not all corporations can or should be lumped together in the same basket with regards to what is expected out of them. The Health Care industry is, or should be, more than just a corporate profit generator. Health Care should be a calling, with different standards than other industries. If they are making medicines to cure diseases but don't care about the people who use them, why should we have any faith or confidence that they'll go to the greatest lengths possible to make sure those medicines are both effective and won't have harmful side effects? Why should we trust them to put our well being ahead of what you feel is their primary reason for being, making the maximum level profit possible?

/Rant.

Great news guys.... With the Air Hawk, flat balls are no longer a problem!!!
Back to Top
Thor View Drop Down
Revolutionary
Revolutionary
Avatar

Joined: 16 Apr 2008
Location: Rockaway, NJ
Status: Offline
Points: 56573
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (3) Thanks(3)   Quote Thor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Aug 2016 at 9:49pm
 
Merck "cares" to the extent that a corporate entity can "care".  Hell, it makes medicines to, presumably, make us healthier.  That's how it cares.  It doesn't have feelings.
 
And to expect that medication be free of side effects---well, we'd be waiting forever for that medication to be made available.  Hell, even aspirin still has side effects.
 
As far as profits---hell, I want them to make big profits.  The more profits, the more that goes into research and development.  I've read that it costs $1 billion to develop a new drug.
 
 
Back to Top
cheesenado View Drop Down
Commercial Hater
Commercial Hater
Avatar

Joined: 19 Dec 2014
Location: Virginia
Status: Offline
Points: 48
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote cheesenado Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Aug 2016 at 10:50pm
Originally posted by Thor Thor wrote:

 
Merck "cares" to the extent that a corporate entity can "care".  Hell, it makes medicines to, presumably, make us healthier.  That's how it cares.  It doesn't have feelings.
 
And to expect that medication be free of side effects---well, we'd be waiting forever for that medication to be made available.  Hell, even aspirin still has side effects.
 
As far as profits---hell, I want them to make big profits.  The more profits, the more that goes into research and development.  I've read that it costs $1 billion to develop a new drug.
 
 

^Thumbs Up^ I don't think people realize how much it costs in money (and time) to develop a new drug that works. Those companies still have to buy equipment, pay employees, and fund future research and testing. 
Back to Top
Papa Lazarou View Drop Down
Ad Exec
Ad Exec
Avatar
Formerly Codtaro

Joined: 18 Nov 2011
Location: New Mexico
Status: Offline
Points: 7720
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote Papa Lazarou Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Aug 2016 at 11:52pm
I can't speak on this one, but aren't most vaccines nothing but money sinks for these companies? They make little profit on most of them.
 
Banana!
BANANA!!
BANANA!!!
BANANA!!
Banana!
Back to Top
TheNilvarg View Drop Down
Junior Executive
Junior Executive


Joined: 06 Feb 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 359
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote TheNilvarg Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Aug 2016 at 12:06am
Thor wins this thread. So tired of uneducated people bashing the pharmaceuticals industry.
Back to Top
Thor View Drop Down
Revolutionary
Revolutionary
Avatar

Joined: 16 Apr 2008
Location: Rockaway, NJ
Status: Offline
Points: 56573
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote Thor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Aug 2016 at 12:16am
Back to Top
Jimbo View Drop Down
Honor Roll
Honor Roll
Avatar

Joined: 19 Apr 2008
Location: Florida
Status: Offline
Points: 45934
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Jimbo Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Aug 2016 at 12:19am
Originally posted by Thor Thor wrote:

Merck "cares" to the extent that a corporate entity can "care".  Hell, it makes medicines to, presumably, make us healthier.  That's how it cares.  It doesn't have feelings.

And to expect that medication be free of side effects---well, we'd be waiting forever for that medication to be made available.  Hell, even aspirin still has side effects.

As far as profits---hell, I want them to make big profits.  The more profits, the more that goes into research and development.  I've read that it costs $1 billion to develop a new drug.


That's all beside the point.

Corporations are run by people, not robots or computers.

The people at the top who sit on the board are the corporation and they're also human beings. As such, they are expected to care about the people who put their products inside their bodies, usually at a huge financial expense.

I never suggested that they shouldn't make a profit, but that shouldn't be their number one concern, and they need to do it in such a way that they CARE enough about the people who use what they develop so that they don't start getting CAREless and sloppy, putting people's lives and health at risk.

This stone cold, unfeeling, straight line "logic" that conservatives love to employ never really holds up under the light of day.






Great news guys.... With the Air Hawk, flat balls are no longer a problem!!!
Back to Top
Jimbo View Drop Down
Honor Roll
Honor Roll
Avatar

Joined: 19 Apr 2008
Location: Florida
Status: Offline
Points: 45934
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Jimbo Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Aug 2016 at 12:22am
Originally posted by TheNilvarg TheNilvarg wrote:

Thor wins this thread. So tired of uneducated people bashing the pharmaceuticals industry.


1) You don't know WTF you're talking about.

2) I wasn't bashing anyone.

3) I am more educated than you are, even though that likely isn't saying much.

4) If you send him a PM and ask him nicely, maybe Thor will send you a picture of himself. You can frame it and keep it on your night stand.

Great news guys.... With the Air Hawk, flat balls are no longer a problem!!!
Back to Top
Jimbo View Drop Down
Honor Roll
Honor Roll
Avatar

Joined: 19 Apr 2008
Location: Florida
Status: Offline
Points: 45934
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Jimbo Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Aug 2016 at 12:24am
Originally posted by Thor Thor wrote:




Maybe you two should get a room.

I wouldn't let an ass kissing from that guy go to my head if I were you.

He's obviously clueless.

Too....

Great news guys.... With the Air Hawk, flat balls are no longer a problem!!!
Back to Top
Thor View Drop Down
Revolutionary
Revolutionary
Avatar

Joined: 16 Apr 2008
Location: Rockaway, NJ
Status: Offline
Points: 56573
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote Thor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Aug 2016 at 12:26am
Originally posted by Jimbo Jimbo wrote:

Originally posted by Thor Thor wrote:

Merck "cares" to the extent that a corporate entity can "care".  Hell, it makes medicines to, presumably, make us healthier.  That's how it cares.  It doesn't have feelings.

And to expect that medication be free of side effects---well, we'd be waiting forever for that medication to be made available.  Hell, even aspirin still has side effects.

As far as profits---hell, I want them to make big profits.  The more profits, the more that goes into research and development.  I've read that it costs $1 billion to develop a new drug.


That's all beside the point.

Corporations are run by people, not robots or computers.

The people at the top who sit on the board are the corporation and they're also human beings. As such, they are expected to care about the people who put their products inside their bodies, usually at a huge financial expense.

I never suggested that they shouldn't make a profit, but that shouldn't be their number one concern, and they need to do it in such a way that they CARE enough about the people who use what they develop so that they don't start getting CAREless and sloppy, putting people's lives and health at risk.

This stone cold, unfeeling, straight line "logic" that conservatives love to employ never really holds up under the light of day.

 
 
Sorry, but it all comes down to the money.
 
 
Back to Top
Jimbo View Drop Down
Honor Roll
Honor Roll
Avatar

Joined: 19 Apr 2008
Location: Florida
Status: Offline
Points: 45934
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Jimbo Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Aug 2016 at 12:48am
Originally posted by Thor Thor wrote:

Sorry, but it all comes down to the money.


Of course it does.

Never said it didn't.

But it's still not right. As evidenced by the number of half-assed junk they're putting out there that's making people sicker than they were to begin with, all because they don't feel as a corporate entity, it's incumbent upon them to care about the people who use their products.

Like I said, with that attitude, they should get out of the business and do something else.

Great news guys.... With the Air Hawk, flat balls are no longer a problem!!!
Back to Top
Papa Lazarou View Drop Down
Ad Exec
Ad Exec
Avatar
Formerly Codtaro

Joined: 18 Nov 2011
Location: New Mexico
Status: Offline
Points: 7720
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote Papa Lazarou Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Aug 2016 at 1:15am
^Then take umbridge with our current standards of ethics and testing laws and regulations and restrictions - not the companies.

The simple and sad fact is that within the current laws, by the time something even gets approved for human testing, so much testing has had to qualify it for THAT so that they're already at the breaking point when they do test on humans. and even when they CAN test on humans, the conditions, controls, etc. are so much more varied and uncontrollable because - coming back to ethics - there's very little way to solidly restrict variables of error or outside contamination of results.

Also, while we have other animal species whose life cycles and internal systems closely mimic our own to where they become better options for seeing long-term usage potentials, the end-fact is that this simply isn't a perfect replacement for seeing what living 80-90-100+ years total would be like - whether the product is taken for a little while or long-term. Even if synthetic or cloned humans became a viable option - how long would it be before uptight ethical standards affected THEIR use as well. Hell, ridiculous ethical standards pretty much single-handedly halted an amazingly successful study on synthetic wombs simply because a full clearance hadn't been achieved before using human subjects.


Also, while there's some legitimate cases of medicines causing serious problems that required a reworking of the medication itself - an even huger proportion of medical lawsuit/damage reports were found to result from abuse, misuse, or cases of extremely rare cross-affect - such as a case where one medication had adverse reactions when the user's diet contained onions.
 
Banana!
BANANA!!
BANANA!!!
BANANA!!
Banana!
Back to Top
Donathan View Drop Down
Junior Executive
Junior Executive


Joined: 19 Sep 2010
Location: Florida
Status: Offline
Points: 3067
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Donathan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Aug 2016 at 2:28am
Originally posted by Thor Thor wrote:


Expecting Merck to care about our health is like expecting the supermarket to care that we're out of bread and milk.  They're businesses.  They're not there to care; they're there to fulfill a need and to make profits.
 
 



Thor, what you just said here about businesses caring about profits and not people reminds me of a complaint I read on a TitleMax review website. Something like, "My husband had a job when we took out a loan from TitleMax and I am on disability. My husband was unexpectedly soon laid off from his job and we still had the TitleMax loan looming over our heads. I called TitleMax to explain that my husband didn't have a job anymore and I was on disability and it would be virtually impossible to pay back the loan anytime soon. TitleMax coldly told us we still had to pay back the loan on the agreed date. TitleMax had no compassion or sympathy for us! All they cared about was their money! We never should have taken out a loan from them!
My name is Donathan, pronounced the same way you pronounce Jonathan, except with a D. :D $608 for her brother's scooter. Fair is fair my ass. Being tough on Public Access TV is priceless.





Back to Top
aka ron View Drop Down
Honor Roll
Honor Roll
Avatar

Joined: 11 Apr 2009
Location: WI
Status: Offline
Points: 22306
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote aka ron Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Aug 2016 at 2:34am
Just like Donna...the side effects are often worse than the initial illness. The Rx companies only care about profits. Death, should never be a side effect.
Just look at all of the class action lawsuits.
Multiple endocrine neoplasia type 2...Say what?
Back to Top
Donathan View Drop Down
Junior Executive
Junior Executive


Joined: 19 Sep 2010
Location: Florida
Status: Offline
Points: 3067
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Donathan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Aug 2016 at 3:15am
Good point, Ron about death not supposing to be a side effect. I love how monotone most commercial announcers sound when they say,"Using Lanitra for Rheumatoid Arthritis may cause death." Um, no thank you! I'd rather have Rheumatoid Arthritis than die!
My name is Donathan, pronounced the same way you pronounce Jonathan, except with a D. :D $608 for her brother's scooter. Fair is fair my ass. Being tough on Public Access TV is priceless.





Back to Top
Anduril View Drop Down
Junior Executive
Junior Executive


Joined: 23 Sep 2014
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 1962
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Anduril Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Aug 2016 at 3:20am
Originally posted by Thor Thor wrote:

 
Merck "cares" to the extent that a corporate entity can "care"...
 
As far as profits---hell, I want them to make big profits.  The more profits, the more that goes into research and development. 
 
I've read that it costs $1 billion to develop a new drug.
 
 
 
Yes, and $998 Million of that is for TV advertising!!
Hey, it's expensive getting naked OJ's to sing in the shower.  Confused
 
 
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.04
Copyright ©2001-2015 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.078 seconds.



"CANDIE!"