Comments on: Washington DC Passes Bill To License Reps http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/01/washington-dc-passes-bill-to-license-reps/ News, Comment and Conversation Fri, 10 Feb 2012 21:16:28 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2 By: Cheryl-Anne http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/01/washington-dc-passes-bill-to-license-reps/#comment-88705 Cheryl-Anne Wed, 09 Jan 2008 16:23:51 +0000 http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/01/washington-dc-passes-bill-to-license-reps/#comment-88705 TO Jack 2 - There are already provisions in the bio ethics code on how to deal with the scenarios you present in your comments. patients unable to speak for themselves or arriving at the hospital without a representative are treated as per the code of ethics. So, this is no concern. I like the idea of doctors informing patients when they are being treated off label. Most patients are smart enough to understand the situation. I think making it part of the information just provides another topic to promote good dialog between the patient and the doctor - nothing wrong with that....However, the new bill also " adds a requirement for docs to include new drug and trend info in their continuing education mandates to learn more about the industry, as well as new instructions for the DC Health Department to track the effectiveness of the bill - from fines collected to number of licensed salespeople - after the end of 2010". So, this should answer your concern of what the doctors know or might not know. This should certainly keep CME accreditation agencies quite busy.... As a former sales rep myself I think this is good thing. If implemented properly it should help to improve service and information to health care professionals. TO Jack 2 -

There are already provisions in the bio ethics code on how to deal with the scenarios you present in your comments. patients unable to speak for themselves or arriving at the hospital without a representative are treated as per the code of ethics. So, this is no concern.

I like the idea of doctors informing patients when they are being treated off label. Most patients are smart enough to understand the situation. I think making it part of the information just provides another topic to promote good dialog between the patient and the doctor - nothing wrong with that….However, the new bill also ” adds a requirement for docs to include new drug and trend info in their continuing education mandates to learn more about the industry, as well as new instructions for the DC Health Department to track the effectiveness of the bill - from fines collected to number of licensed salespeople - after the end of 2010″. So, this should answer your concern of what the doctors know or might not know. This should certainly keep CME accreditation agencies quite busy….

As a former sales rep myself I think this is good thing. If implemented properly it should help to improve service and information to health care professionals.

]]> By: Jack2 http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/01/washington-dc-passes-bill-to-license-reps/#comment-88647 Jack2 Wed, 09 Jan 2008 15:54:07 +0000 http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/01/washington-dc-passes-bill-to-license-reps/#comment-88647 QUOTE: Further, it requires docs to tell their patients when they’re prescribing meds for a treatment not specifically authorized by the FDA. Is that actually true? Am I the only one who sees that as a big deal? I'm surprised the AMA doesn't care about this one. And what if someone arrives at an ER unconcious/psychotic? Do they need to get consent forms signed to use a med off-label (IV Haldol is technically off-label). Do doctors actually know which uses are off-label and which are on-label? Will pediatricians, who routinely prescribe off-label because of their patient population, who practice in DC now need to alert parents when going off-label, sometimes for drugs that are 30 years old? Is every antibiotic routinely used in kids approved for kids? QUOTE: Further, it requires docs to tell their patients when they’re prescribing meds for a treatment not specifically authorized by the FDA.

Is that actually true? Am I the only one who sees that as a big deal? I’m surprised the AMA doesn’t care about this one. And what if someone arrives at an ER unconcious/psychotic? Do they need to get consent forms signed to use a med off-label (IV Haldol is technically off-label). Do doctors actually know which uses are off-label and which are on-label? Will pediatricians, who routinely prescribe off-label because of their patient population, who practice in DC now need to alert parents when going off-label, sometimes for drugs that are 30 years old? Is every antibiotic routinely used in kids approved for kids?

]]> By: James http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/01/washington-dc-passes-bill-to-license-reps/#comment-88599 James Wed, 09 Jan 2008 15:20:49 +0000 http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/01/washington-dc-passes-bill-to-license-reps/#comment-88599 Doc, how is this the "first" step in controlling "promotional wastes and abuses of the pharma industry"? Numerous states, as well as the Feds, have imposed dozens of different laws and spent billions of taxpayer dollars going after companies allegedly engaged in off-label promotion, FCA violations, etc. They've even jailed at least one doctor for engaging in off-label promotion (which, last I checked, was still legal for doctors to do). How about someone take the first step in reigning in government waste? They're using our money, not theirs. And Nathan, you're spot-on right. I live in the D.C. area, and even Councilman Marion Barry disagreed with this one--he believes the money to administer the new licensing program could be better spent on AIDS prevention and healthcare. But, I guess if they can turn it into a revenue generator, it can replace the red-light cameras they rigged to short-time to generate extra cash. Doc, how is this the “first” step in controlling “promotional wastes and abuses of the pharma industry”? Numerous states, as well as the Feds, have imposed dozens of different laws and spent billions of taxpayer dollars going after companies allegedly engaged in off-label promotion, FCA violations, etc. They’ve even jailed at least one doctor for engaging in off-label promotion (which, last I checked, was still legal for doctors to do).

How about someone take the first step in reigning in government waste? They’re using our money, not theirs.

And Nathan, you’re spot-on right. I live in the D.C. area, and even Councilman Marion Barry disagreed with this one–he believes the money to administer the new licensing program could be better spent on AIDS prevention and healthcare. But, I guess if they can turn it into a revenue generator, it can replace the red-light cameras they rigged to short-time to generate extra cash.

]]> By: Atlex http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/01/washington-dc-passes-bill-to-license-reps/#comment-88484 Atlex Wed, 09 Jan 2008 13:02:55 +0000 http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/01/washington-dc-passes-bill-to-license-reps/#comment-88484 This is nothing but a shakedown for money under the guise of protecting public health. What can they require for licensure? A college degree? A couple of hours in a class room? What agency is going to enforce anything once the license is issued? There's no tie to marketing restictions, use of data, or anything else that would impede a reps interaction with a physician. This is nothing but a shakedown for money under the guise of protecting public health. What can they require for licensure? A college degree? A couple of hours in a class room? What agency is going to enforce anything once the license is issued? There’s no tie to marketing restictions, use of data, or anything else that would impede a reps interaction with a physician.

]]> By: Doc http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/01/washington-dc-passes-bill-to-license-reps/#comment-87903 Doc Wed, 09 Jan 2008 06:36:54 +0000 http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/01/washington-dc-passes-bill-to-license-reps/#comment-87903 Its about time additional steps were taken to control the promotional wastes and abuses of the pharma industry. Hopefully this is the first step in reigning in the marketing and sales departments. They are selling medicine, not cars. Its about time additional steps were taken to control the promotional wastes and abuses of the pharma industry. Hopefully this is the first step in reigning in the marketing and sales departments. They are selling medicine, not cars.

]]> By: Sea http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/01/washington-dc-passes-bill-to-license-reps/#comment-87860 Sea Wed, 09 Jan 2008 06:22:13 +0000 http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/01/washington-dc-passes-bill-to-license-reps/#comment-87860 Slippery slope argument. Who defines "excessive" promotion? You're just breeding more bureaucrats. And a $2500 "license fee"? please... these punative costs are just going to be passed on to the consumer. Slippery slope argument. Who defines “excessive” promotion? You’re just breeding more bureaucrats. And a $2500 “license fee”? please… these punative costs are just going to be passed on to the consumer.

]]> By: Bob Freeman http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/01/washington-dc-passes-bill-to-license-reps/#comment-87405 Bob Freeman Wed, 09 Jan 2008 00:26:00 +0000 http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/01/washington-dc-passes-bill-to-license-reps/#comment-87405 A great first step in controlling excessive promotion and addressing abuses that pharma is unwilling or unable to remedy. The next step is to impose a licensing fee of $2500 per rep. A great first step in controlling excessive promotion and addressing abuses that pharma is unwilling or unable to remedy. The next step is to impose a licensing fee of $2500 per rep.

]]>