Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Pharmacists Convince Search Engines To Self-Censor

Posted by timothy on from the having-no-self dept.

RogueShopper writes "The National Association of Boards of Pharmacists (NABP) has teamed up with Drugstore.com in a seemingly successful campaign to 'rid search engines of ads from rogue pharmacies.' Overture removed ranked ads at the request of MSN and Yahoo!, and AOL and Google complied, also. In an apparently selfless act Yahoo! also wiped out its entire directory tree for pharmacies. Meanwhile, anyone can cross the border, walk into a Mexican pharmacy and buy whatever they want. Big busines controlling content ... hmmm ... looks like it's getting closer to broadcast television. Thank god for DMOZ.org!" (Here's Google's cache of Yahoo!'s Pharmacies list).

2 of 63 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Changing markets, stale business by bmetzler · · Score: 0, Flamebait
    Wanna do away with government interference in drug prices? Fine - start by ceasing the issuance of patents.

    You just want people to die from diseases that could be cured pharmacytically, don't you? If a drug company is going to invest tons of money to develop a drug that another companies are just going to sell to drive them out of business, do you think that they are going to invest that money?

    No, they're just going to let you die. And you deserve it.

    -Brent
  2. Re:Changing markets, stale business by bmetzler · · Score: 0, Flamebait
    Bush isn't cutting spending. He is growing the goverment at a rate that is unmatched in the past 40 years. And most of the growth in spending isn't from the War on Terror, it is from domestic spending. Spending that the GOP doesn't have to do.

    So, you think Medicare is fine the way it was?

    Domestic spending is unfortunetly what "most" of the US wants right now. You might not realize it, but it's going to get a lot worse before it gets better. You make it sound like there's some "solution" out there that President Bush just needs to find and sign on the dotted line and all the domestic spending will go away. But the problem remains that much of the people in this country demand domestic spending. So some money has to be spent domestically while trying to reform things the best you can. That's the consequence of a Republic form of government instead of a dictatorship.

    It's like a car that people are pushing down a slippery hill. You can apply the brakes and try to get back up the hill, but you're going to slige further before you go up.

    We didn't get into this mess yesterday, and we are not going to get out tomorrow.

    Do you think I should not support President Bush because of his domestic spending? If not, who should I support? Certainly none of the Democratic candidates will have better policies on domestic spending.

    -Brent