Paid To Prescribe? 10:30 Hearing, Watch Here
5 CommentsBy Ed Silverman // June 27th, 2007 // 9:52 am
Herb Kohl, a Wisconsin Democrat who is a big fan of generics and chairs the Senate Special Committee on Aging, holds a hearing shortly to explore the relationship between docs and drugmakers. Maybe he should visit Vermont.
Want to watch? Click here.
Here are some of the folks who will testify:
Sharon Treat, a member of Maine’s Legislature, executive director of the National Legislative Association on Prescription Drug Prices and a vocal critics of big pharma. She’s active in defending the right of states to restrict pharma marketing.
Jerome Kassirer, a Tufts University professor who was once editor in chief of the New England Journal of Medicine, will warn that “doctors are at risk of corruption from the perverse incentives from industry,†his prepared testimony says.
Marjorie Powell, PhRMA’s senior assistant general counsel, will argue that pharma marketing keeps docs up to date.
Hat tip to Health Blog
knowsbigpharmaways
Interesting and typical; Of 3 people who would testify the 2 first will obviously make points that big pharma is corrupting the health workers with thier overwhelming offerings designed to incerease their influence and pofits in the end. These two are not conected directly or indirectly to big pharma. On the other hand Ms. Powell is part of the big pharma and naturally “will argue that pharma marketing keeps docs up to date”. She is simply an apologist for the big pharma that will come up with all kinds of arguments that justify thier way of doing business. Yes the marketing does CONTRIBUTE to keeping the doc up to date but is only the minute part of this process. What we object to is the corruptive ways big pharma uses to influence and control our health care workers at most levels, ecpecially physicians who have the power to Rx. And that is wahat this is all about. Rxing their drugs beyond what they would normally do.
Just look at the post below “Pharma Give Vermount Docs lot of Money”. Does anyone in their right mind believe that tose docs who collected all that money really “earned” it? The overpayments via honoraria is the oldest and easiest way to get a doc hooked and pay them off. Of course there are many more ways to as someone said, “skin the cat”. (apology to cat lovers).
Lets ask Ms. Powell what she thinks about that? Most likely she would have a completely “logical” answer (read apology).
Dr. Remulac
This tune is getting very old. I am a medical professional, former academic and clinician, and now work in R&D on the pharma side of things. As such, I have been on both sides of this equation. I am here to tell you that it most certainly takes 2 to tango. Manufacturing and marketing pharmaceuticals is a business, and like any other business you have to spend resources in order to grow your business (not to mention the fact that they have the right to do so, and are allowed to do so by law). There are many, many laws/rules/regulations/guidelines governing how this may be done, and as long as pharma does it within these constraints then I don’t see what the issue is. If it is somehow perceived that this is peddling undue influence, then let me make it clear that the prescriber who is influenced is just as much to blame as pharma. Any prescriber who would make a medical decision based solely on what some pharma rep says to him/her or on the basis of having rec’d some “reward” from pharma SHOULD IMMEDIATELY LOSE HIS/HER LICENSE TO PRACTICE! Likewise, any pharma company operating outside the law deserves to be punished severely. However, to focus solely on one party when it takes 2 to wark together in complicity is downright wrong.
knowsbigpharmaways
This maybe an old tune Doc but it is still popular and is still “unresolved”. Yes it takes two to tango but the one with the enormous purse is the one who is asking the other partner to get into the dance while offerin selection of “prizes”. Sure no half decent doc would Rx purely on the fact that he just got back from Paris medical meeting with all expenses paid and would make a lot of money presenting the label and off label advantages of drug in question to his peers on behalf of the Co, but there is always that question why he/he prefers that drug in all patients?
Yes the big pharma is “business” but is not like any other business. It is still suposed to be “ethical” business. The way it is done by most cos it ain’t ethical anymore. Look at Pfizer, BMS.ScheringPlough, AstraZeneca and so on that were fined in hundreds of millions by your DOJ for doing the unethical and illegal. If they stuck with those rules you bring up no one would be hurt That is hard for them to do for when they do business by adding the misconduct they do much better.
As for the doctors. They are the other dencing partner but not all of them. Although what some do is not right one can say they are only human as anyone else. How long one can resist the offerings by big pharma that are so tempting and offten hughly profitable. I encountered only one doctor who refused my offering on behalf of my co.
The blogs are full of attacks on big pharma. Maybe they should focus as much on the other dancing partner as you suggest. If at least one side starts with going “streight” the other may just have to change.
Perhaps the biggest “crime” of the big pharma is the fact that over the last 20-25 years they managed to corrupted good deal of our most precious health care resource - our doctors.
Dr. Remulac
I’m with you, but only to a point. I’m one of those “Drs”, and I can tell you that about 90% of my colleagues went into medicine for money and status first, and caring for others is a distant second or third. Unfortunately, there are more than enough dance partners for pharma to give the whole lot a black eye. What few outside of pharma recognize is that one of the biggest “bribes” used by pharma is that involving prestige and playing to the rather large ego that many of these docs have. Making a doc the first to be in a study, or to be appointed to a an advisory board with other experts, or to be a member of a study steering committee, etc, is often more important than money to these guys.
Melody
If any of you have watched the current immigration debate, perhaps the most important “take away” has been revealed by the “opposition” who states that we (American citizens) don’t trust our government to enforce the laws.
Likewise, doctors who have set themselves above the average person and should, perhaps operate with a least a bit of noblesse oblige, ARE affected not only by money but by the power.AND WE NO LONGER TRUST THEM. (Like our government, they may be “all we have”–but that doesn’t mean we either trust them, or even like them.) I have raised my voice more than once in proclaiming that I believe Big Pharma, over the past few years, always pushing the envelope of “creating marketing,” has become EVIL–not merely putting profit before patients, but essentially saying “to hell with patients. If we hurt them, we’ll slog through the court system, and eventually settle, if we have to.” (Patients appear to be little more than “expendable” consumers.)
But doctors–highly educated and well-trained–are the ONLY interface between patients and drugs. Their professional organizations and associations seek to deflect accountability, throwing the onus back onto pharma and regulators . . . But, these elite professionals ARE responsible; they have access to reports and studies, and supposedly their training provides them analytical skills that far outstrip our own. Likewise, they, en masse, have the power to impact deceitful and/or harmful pharmaceutical practices and products. There is more than enough villainy to go around, and I would paint (most) doctors with the same EVIL-brush that I use for Big Pharma.