{"id":266,"date":"2021-02-05T16:23:02","date_gmt":"2021-02-05T21:23:02","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/commons.princeton.edu\/invisible-violence\/?page_id=266"},"modified":"2021-04-14T19:50:40","modified_gmt":"2021-04-14T23:50:40","slug":"the-history-and-impacts-of-big-pharma","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/commons.princeton.edu\/invisible-violence\/the-history-and-impacts-of-big-pharma\/","title":{"rendered":"The History and Impacts of Big Pharma"},"content":{"rendered":"

Our society\u2019s valuation of drugs, and the crucial role that drugs play in our daily lives, is manifested in the name \u201cBig Pharma;\u201d a critical analysis of history with an eye towards neoliberal policy enables us to see how the pharmaceutical industry gained this nickname.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

The\u00a0<\/span>Harrison Narcotics Act<\/span> of 1914<\/span><\/strong>\u00a0marked the beginning of drug regulation in the United States. The government voted to instate these policies to control over-the-counter use of morphine, heroin, opium, or cocaine that were additives in common cold medications or those for toothaches (Kelvey 2018). These regulations were needed partially due to Friedrich Serturner\u2019s isolation of morphine from opium in 1805, which triggered a market for pain killers delivered via tablet or hypodermic syringe (Kelvey 2018). However, at this time, drug producers only marketed their opioids and so-called \u201cless addictive\u201d versions to physicians. At the turn of the 20th century, physicians had been well warned through their social networks of the addiction present in their society and how this was fueled by specific medication ingredients (Kelvey 2018).<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"
Ad published in American Druggist and Pharmaceutical Record, volume 36, number 6, March 25, 1900; image taken from \u201cFEAR Narcotic Drugs!\u201d The Passage of the Harrison Act by Anne Garner; https:\/\/nyamcenterforhistory.org\/2014\/12\/17\/fear-narcotic-drugs-the-passage-of-the-harrison-act\/<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

The concern of regulating addictive ingredients fueled the\u00a0<\/span>Pure Food and Drug Act in 1906<\/span><\/strong>, which marked the beginning of the Food and Drug Administration that we have today. From this point forward, pharmaceutical companies were not hindered but rather \u201c<\/span>coevolved<\/span><\/em>\u201d with the regulation to ensure that profits were maintained (Kelvey 2018).<\/span><\/p>\n

Neoliberal influences, still acting in the late\u00a0<\/span>1990s from Reagan-era deregulation<\/span><\/strong>, fueled the present-day opioid crisis by causing the\u00a0<\/span>1997 FDA guidelines to allow pharmaceutical companies to utilize \u201cdirect-to-consumer marketing of drugs\u201d<\/span><\/strong>\u00a0(Kelvey 2018).\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

This act of \u201cderegulation\u201d did not deregulate the pharmaceutical industry for the benefit of the consumer to make their own informed drug choices (as neoliberalists will attest) but re-regulated the power of marketing to Big Pharma companies, such as Purdue Pharma.<\/span><\/h5>\n

In 1995, Purdue Pharma introduced OxyContin;\u00a0<\/span><\/strong>they marketed it as a \u201cless-addictive\u201d form of oxycodone because of its \u201ctime-releasing formulation\u2026[which] allowed a single dose to last 12 hours\u201d (Kelvey 2018). Suddenly, pharmaceutical companies hit the public with an onslaught of drug advertising (which \u201chit a peak of $3.3 billion in 2006\u201d) while the companies specifically targeted physicians for opioid marketing (Kelvey 2018).<\/span><\/p>\n