CASE 11.2 Study Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

11.2 - Case Study Example It is therefore evident that any acne patient who comes across proactiv and gets to see the results is more than thankful for the product. Using infomercials was the best decision for the marketing of proactiv for various reasons as Dr. Rodan and Dr. Kathy came to understand. First, Acne was an embarrassing issue therefore selling the product openly would not produce positive results, as patient turnout would be very low. Second, people need to be educated on how to treat their acne something that could not just work in a 30-60 second advert. Thirdly, infomercial audience was a good target as it consisted of women between their 20s to their 40s who would do anything to get rid of the acne problem therefore providing a good market segment. Through infomercials, the product has the opportunity to air testimonials from people who have experienced positive results. It is clear that Rodan and Kathy were ready to throw in the towel after unsuccessfully seeking for investment capital with no success. The deal with Guthy-Renker was their key to success and if it had not happened then proactive would have had very low chances of existing in the market today. Infomercials were a better choice for Proactiv than print and media advertising because it was necessary to educate people on the product rather than just advertise (Agree and Martin). Infomercials offered more time to make this possible as compared to advertising through media and print where not many people would pay attention and most probably would assume it not to work as the ones already in the market. Proactiv’s positioning strategy has made it to be a success in the market as these strategies were able to distinguish it from the other products that were already in the market. Categorizing their product under skin care product rather than acne products enabled them to tap into a more attractive and larger market share. Coming up with the name Proactiv also played a major role for the product

Would the decriminalization of marijuana have a net positive or Research Paper

Would the decriminalization of marijuana have a net positive or negative impact on Canadian society - Research Paper Example Nevertheless, its use in the medical community is being supported because apparently its benefits to patients would far outweigh its risks. Its use in Canada is considered a crime and harsh penalties are imposed among violators. Suggestions for its decriminalization are currently being discussed. This paper shall now discuss whether or not the decriminalization of marijuana would have a net positive or negative impact on Canadian society. It shall also discuss who would benefit and who would lose from its decriminalization. This paper is being undertaken in order to establish a clear and comprehensive understanding of marijuana, its implications for use, and its overall impact on society. Discussion Under the 1923 Opium and Drug Act, marijuana was classified as an illegal drug and those violating the provisions of the act were liable to face criminal penalties (Khoo). In 1997, marijuana was covered by the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, and this law is the main legislation which some interest groups are seeking to amend. They cite how the Ontario Court of Appeal was able to decide in favor of the possession of 30 grams of marijuana – mostly for medicinal purposes (Khoo). The court argued that banning marijuana would be tantamount to violating the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Canada is considered the first nation to apply the regulated medicinal use of marijuana; however, the Marijuana Medical Access Regulations did not adequately consider the issue of recreational use (Khoo). In 2003, a new ruling by the Ontario court decided that the possession of small amounts of marijuana was not anymore valid; the courts noted how hundreds of thousands of young Canadians were engaged in recreational marijuana use and that no firm legal provisions on the use of the drug have been set forth by the legislators (Khoo). The Ontario Court of Appeals then passed new rulings in order to make it easier for patients to avail of the drug for medicinal purposes. To this day, this issue has yet to be settled in Canada (Khoo). And this issue involves relevant players including the patients who need marijuana for medicinal purposes, the recreational drug users, the doctors who prescribe the substance for their patients, the legislators who have the burden of deciding on passing (or not passing) the law to decriminalize marijuana, police officers and law enforcement authorities who are enforcing the law, and the international community. These individuals and social groups are all stakeholders in the resolution of the issue on the decriminalization of marijuana. For those who use the drug for medicinal purposes, they believe that decriminalizing marijuana use would largely be beneficial to them because they would be able to benefit from the medical benefits of the substance – effects which they would not be able to experience from any drug or any other intervention. Decriminalizing marijuana use can be beneficial for the following purpos es: to stimulate appetite of HIV/AIDS patients and to relieve cachexia of cancer patients; to relieve and reduce nausea and vomiting induced by chemotherapy among cancer patients; to reduce the intraocular pressure for glaucoma patients; to provide analgesic effect for cancer patients; and to relieve the spasticity and nocturnal spasms caused by neurologic and movement disorders (Yambura, pp. 2-4). For these reasons, patients positively impacted by marijuana use would stand to gain from the decriminalization of marijuana. The main issue being taken with the decriminaliza