At some point or another in our lives, we have all had to take a trip to the doctor’s office. Often times our visits end with a pricy medical bill and a prescription for some sort of medication: whether it be vitamins, antibiotics, or ointments, at the end of the day we have to pick them up from our local pharmacy. Amongst those who have taken their annual trip to the doctors are patients with Type 2 Diabetes. The horrible diseases that interferes with people’s blood sugar sends diabetics running to the doctors in hopes of a cure to their illness rather than the temporary insulin that they are always having to rely on. During the late 1900’s those people were given a solution to their problem that went by the name of Avandia, or so they thought.
…show more content…
The press will often catch a reader’s attention with a blatantly stated title like in this care the article written by Gordon Gibb had the title, “Avandia Heart Attack Risk, Questions Remain” or another article written by Gina Kolata titled, “When Drugs Cause Problems They Are Supposed to Prevent.” They are no longer targeting people with Type 2 diabetes, but rather the public in general, while subtly pursuing the readers that this medication is no good. You will often see statistics of all that went wrong, the company name, lots of blame, the medication name, the side affects to the medicine, and often times rude comments toward the companies. They focus on all the bad, they won’t tell you how many people benefited they will only state how the creators lied to the people. Often times the paper will try to be persuasive and rally people up to get these medications off the shelves. Dates and underlines/bolded/slanted letters will often point out the worst parts of the paper/article to bring the readers attention directly to those points. For example Gibb capitalized “Black Box” when describing the warning label that would have to go on all Avandia medication bottles. In this case, he even took it a step further to have a statistic thrown out to the audience by a doctor. Dr. Steven Nissen, a cardiologist from Cleveland stated that patients taking Avandia had a 43% higher risk of cardiovascular events for Mr. Gibb’s article. Finally, they bring the FDA into the situation because they are a credible source when it comes to medications. They often times end the article noting that the FDA or some other group it trying to take care of the situation to keep the readers buying their paper to find out more information on the situation. Another
The press will often catch a reader’s attention with a blatantly stated title like in this care the article written by Gordon Gibb had the title, “Avandia Heart Attack Risk, Questions Remain” or another article written by Gina Kolata titled, “When Drugs Cause Problems They Are Supposed to Prevent.” They are no longer targeting people with Type 2 diabetes, but rather the public in general, while subtly pursuing the readers that this medication is no good. You will often see statistics of all that went wrong, the company name, lots of blame, the medication name, the side affects to the medicine, and often times rude comments toward the companies. They focus on all the bad, they won’t tell you how many people benefited they will only state how the creators lied to the people. Often times the paper will try to be persuasive and rally people up to get these medications off the shelves. Dates and underlines/bolded/slanted letters will often point out the worst parts of the paper/article to bring the readers attention directly to those points. For example Gibb capitalized “Black Box” when describing the warning label that would have to go on all Avandia medication bottles. In this case, he even took it a step further to have a statistic thrown out to the audience by a doctor. Dr. Steven Nissen, a cardiologist from Cleveland stated that patients taking Avandia had a 43% higher risk of cardiovascular events for Mr. Gibb’s article. Finally, they bring the FDA into the situation because they are a credible source when it comes to medications. They often times end the article noting that the FDA or some other group it trying to take care of the situation to keep the readers buying their paper to find out more information on the situation. Another