Comments on: New Hampshire: Restrict Data Or Die! Chapter 3 http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/01/new-hampshire-restrict-data-or-die-chapter-3/ News, Comment and Conversation Fri, 10 Feb 2012 22:25:53 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2 By: Dr. G. http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/01/new-hampshire-restrict-data-or-die-chapter-3/#comment-87514 Dr. G. Wed, 09 Jan 2008 01:49:41 +0000 http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/01/new-hampshire-restrict-data-or-die-chapter-3/#comment-87514 As a Physician I am entitled to privacy of my prescribing habits( that are dictated by the latest professional guidelines), without having the press behind my shoulders. But I'm not concerned at all about the phrmaceutical industry: they always inflate the positive and minimize the negative. Many Doctors I know completly avoid talking to the reps. The general public has no right to know what Dr. G. prescribes, just like has no right to know which medication the court Judges are taking. As a Physician I am entitled to privacy of my prescribing habits( that are dictated by the latest professional guidelines), without having the press behind my shoulders.
But I’m not concerned at all about the phrmaceutical industry: they always inflate the positive and minimize the negative. Many Doctors I know completly avoid talking to the reps. The general public has no right to know what Dr. G. prescribes, just like has no right to know which medication the court Judges are taking.

]]> By: ol cranky http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/01/new-hampshire-restrict-data-or-die-chapter-3/#comment-87465 ol cranky Wed, 09 Jan 2008 01:23:57 +0000 http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/01/new-hampshire-restrict-data-or-die-chapter-3/#comment-87465 Pharma companies do have the ability to track prescriptions/use of injectables (since they frequently have commercial ops folks to help get the use approved by insurance companies)and, as we all know, the only docs who are treated like VIPs who aren't high prescribers are the docs they are trying to woo to use & promote the product. I can get behind making prescription rates by physician available if there is a centralized place where the general public can have access to that data presented side by side with the information regarding all grants and other rewards provided to that provider (this data should also be cross-referenced by practice/institution). Pharma companies do have the ability to track prescriptions/use of injectables (since they frequently have commercial ops folks to help get the use approved by insurance companies)and, as we all know, the only docs who are treated like VIPs who aren’t high prescribers are the docs they are trying to woo to use & promote the product. I can get behind making prescription rates by physician available if there is a centralized place where the general public can have access to that data presented side by side with the information regarding all grants and other rewards provided to that provider (this data should also be cross-referenced by practice/institution).

]]> By: Bob Freeman http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/01/new-hampshire-restrict-data-or-die-chapter-3/#comment-87404 Bob Freeman Wed, 09 Jan 2008 00:23:04 +0000 http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/01/new-hampshire-restrict-data-or-die-chapter-3/#comment-87404 While I accept allbeit reluctantly the commercial free speech argument, this doesn't mean the practice can't be regulated through the tax/Medicaid supplemental rebate program. The simple solution is to impose financial disincentives on physicians who do not opt out of disclosure of their prescribing data or to tax the sale of data to pharma companies to the extent it makes data acquisition painful--add supplemental rebates on companies' products, for example, or impose a tax directly on the companies which sell data within a state. To argue this practice benefits patient care is ridiculous and self-serving. While I accept allbeit reluctantly the commercial free speech argument, this doesn’t mean the practice can’t be regulated through the tax/Medicaid supplemental rebate program. The simple solution is to impose financial disincentives on physicians who do not opt out of disclosure of their prescribing data or to tax the sale of data to pharma companies to the extent it makes data acquisition painful–add supplemental rebates on companies’ products, for example, or impose a tax directly on the companies which sell data within a state.

To argue this practice benefits patient care is ridiculous and self-serving.

]]> By: Dan http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/01/new-hampshire-restrict-data-or-die-chapter-3/#comment-87376 Dan Tue, 08 Jan 2008 23:57:37 +0000 http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/01/new-hampshire-restrict-data-or-die-chapter-3/#comment-87376 Pharma industry public relations insist that such data provided to its sales reps. is entirely for the benefit of the patients of any given doctor, in order to guide them to recommended medicinal treatment. Obvious bias and deception. Pharma industry public relations insist that such data provided to its sales reps. is entirely for the benefit of the patients of any given doctor, in order to guide them to recommended medicinal treatment. Obvious bias and deception.

]]>