AbstractOne explanation for drug bans is that regulators know more than consumers about product quality. But why not just communicate the information in their ban, perhaps via a “would have banned” label?Because product labeling is cheap-talk, any small market failure tempts regulators to lie about quality, inducing consumers who suspect such lies to not believe everything they are told. In fact, when regulators expect market failures to result in under-consumption of a drug, and so would not ban it for informed consumers, regulators ex ante prefer to commit to not banning this drug for uninformed consumers
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
Similar books and articles
Peligro!: Failure to Warn of a Product's Inherent Risk in Spanish Should Constitute a Product Defect.Keith Sealing - unknown
Consumer Autonomy and Sufficiency of Gmf Labeling.Helena Siipi & Susanne Uusitalo - 2008 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 21 (4):353-369.
Consumer Attitudes Towards the Development of Animal-Friendly Husbandry Systems.L. J. Frewer, A. Kole, S. M. A. Van de Kroon & C. de Lauwere - 2005 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 18 (4):345-367.
Why Athletic Doping Should Be Banned.Eric Chwang - 2012 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 29 (1):33-49.
The Demand for Regulation of Financial Disclosures: The Case of the Insurance Industry. [REVIEW]James C. Gaa & Itzhak Krinsky - 1988 - Journal of Business Ethics 7 (1-2):29 - 39.
Banning All Drug Promotion is the Best Option Pending Major Reforms.Peter R. Mansfield - 2005 - Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 2 (2):75-81.