Centocor’s 411: The Drugmaker Launches A Blog
21 CommentsBy Ed Silverman // March 1st, 2008 // 11:26 am
It may not be a trend, but pharma is tip-toeing into the blogosphere. Last year, you may recall, Centocor’s parent created JNJBTW, or Johnson & Johnson By The Way, a now-and-then forum for one of the health care giant’s corporate communications people to chat about various doings and explain why J&J behaves as it does. That was quickly followed by a blog for Glaxo’s Alli, the OTC diet pill which, not surprisingly given the topic, generated more interactive discussion, albeit of the highly restricted form.
So now, Centocor is feeling emboldened and rolling out its own version, called CNTO411. Not a great name - CNTO refers to the code Centocor gives drugs under development. And the look is pretty bland. But like JNJBTW, there are hopes and dreams: “We have started this blog because there are so many interesting things happening at our company, in our industry, and especially around immunology – the area in which we play. Although you can read about these things in the news or on other healthcare blogs, we want to join that conversation, because we have much to say,” writes Melissa Katz, the Centocor spokeswoman and newly named blogger.
And in a conversation, Katz tells us that: “We’ve understood over the last year or two that the social media space is taking on more and more importance,but we didnt have a voice or a way to represent ourselves in the blogosphere. So this will present our personality as a company. We’d like to be as transparent as we can. We want to respond and be part of the dialogue…No, we won’t be marketing or promoting a product.”
Of course, the big elephant in the room whenever pharma discusses ’social media’ is the fear of adverse event reporting and liability. The new blog plans to report any adverse events that come its way, although comments will still be screened. And so CNTO411 will be another in what promises to be a long-running experiment in which communications, marketing and legal teams clash over the extent to which pharma can - and should - engage the rest of the world. For now, such sites shouldn’t be mistaken as forums providing an unfettered flow of information, but at least this is a start.
www.worldpharmanews.net
Pharmalot » Centocor’s 411: The Drugmaker Launches A Blog…
So now, Centocor is feeling emboldened and rolling out its own version, called CNTO411. Not a great name - CNTO refers to the code Centocor gives drugs under development. And the look is pretty bland. But like JNJBTW, there are hopes and dreams: “We h…
ol cranky
yet another, highly edited, one-sided pseudo dialogue with a drug company.
Marc Monseau
hmmm… “now-and-then forum” — fair point — but then again, we all can’t be as prolific as you, Ed! : )
Marc
Ed Silverman
Hey Marc,
Good to hear from you, but I’m not prolific as much as I’m paranoid, obsessive and have trouble focusing on any one thing for very long. Other than working on a trading desk, what else could I do?
Cheers
ed
PharmPro
Novartis has a new slogan.. They want to be the Toyota of the Pharma Industry… Anyboby know what’s up with that???
Insider
http://cnto411.blogspot.com/
Just thought I might help liven things up a bit!
Pip pip!
Jack
Matthew Holford
LOL! I hope they can cope with the banter - I suspect that it will be a rough ride, initially!
In any event, if they censor comments other than for abusive commentary, the blog will die a death, very quickly. And who the fuck wants to go to a pharmaceutical company for information about drugs, anyway?
Matt
Melissa Katz
Hey guys,
I’m cool with the banter, but any 5th year senior can beat up a freshman. You’re the experts, help us maintain the dialogue. If you want more transparency from this industry, you can be part of the solution. I don’t mind skepticism, but give me something I can use. Looking forward to it!
Frosh Blogger,
Melissa
Matthew Holford
Melissa Katz wrote:
“…I don’t mind skepticism, but give me something I can use…”
Melissa, do us a favour, and try to avoid posting propoganda (eg, unsupported “global” claims of efficacy, such as “[some drug, or other] has helped millions, since its launch.”). We’re pretty well attuned to that kind of thing.
Matt
Nathan
Matt,
What in the world are you talking about?
You’ve already stated time and again you don’t trust any statements coming from a pharma company — so it really don’t matter what she says. You’ve already stated in previous comment threads that you don’t trust pharmaceutical companies, government agencies, or peer reviewed journals. So your opinion really doesn’t matter — no matter what we in the pharma industry say, you won’t believe it. Frankly I wonder why you bother blogging at all other than just to spew out your own ill-informed opinions. If my opinions are worthless to you, then your opinions become worthless to me. Communication involves a certain level of trust and respect on the parts of BOTH sides. You’ve shown absolutely no trust and respect of the science that goes on in industry — and you’ll get none in return.
Matthew Holford
Nathan wrote:
“You shown absolutely no trust…”
And with good cause, Nathan. One only has to betray a trust once, in order to cast doubt upon all subsequent transactions. Besides, I don’t need you to trust me: I’m not the [expletive deleted] manufacturing dubious chemistry for general consumption, am I?
Matt
Insider
Hey Melissa,
Fresh blogger or not: what does a Senior Dirctor of Corporate Communications pull in these days and how’s the “Bada Bing” lawsuit goin’!
How’s that for dialogue!
Cheers
Jack
Nathan
Matt says:
“One only has to betray a trust once, in order to cast doubt upon all subsequent transactions.”
That’s fair — but I’ll ask a personal question: Do you take any medication? If so, that’s a level of trust in the manufacturer and the government agencies that approved it. You may not speak any trust with your mouth, but I am guessing that your actions say otherwise.
“I don’t need you to trust me: I’m not the cunt manufacturing dubious chemistry for general consumption, am I?”
Real nice way to foster dialog Matt. If you don’t need (or desire) your readers to trust you, then there isn’t any point in writing, is there? I’ll say it again, slightly different: Unless you are willing to show some level of trust and respect for the science that goes on in the industry, there is no basis for conversion between us. It is the conversation between us (and others like us) that is the purpose of this blog (and the blog in question in this thread).
Matthew Holford
Nathan wrote:
“…Real nice way to foster dialog Matt…”
[shrug] You may not like the sentiment, but it happens to be true.
Yes, I do take a drug: salbutamol, which I find works just fine. However, it is the SSRI that I took that I have an issue with, as well you know. The “smoke and mirror lockdown” (isn’t Michael Stipe great?), that I have encountered, subsequently, would be laughable, if it didn’t impact me so personally.
Matt
Nathan
That’s fine Matt — except that the site in question is Centocor’s 411. It has nothing to do with SSRIs. Moreover, your standard diatribe against the pharma industry generally does not mention SSRIs — you berate those in industry as dishonest greedy monsters reguardless of whether we are pursuing treatments for depression, AIDs, asthma or cancer.
The reason I asked you if you took any medications (prescription ones in particular) is because the same scientific method used to research SSRIs is (and was) used to research virtually every other drug currently on the market. Evidently your distrust of the industry is rather selective.
Matthew Holford
Nathan wrote:
“That’s fine Matt — except that the site in question is Centocor’s 411…”
“Dishonest, greedy monsters”? I believe that that is your language, not mine. I am well aware as to why you chose to ask me about any medications that I was taking. You will note that I was open and honest in my reply, when I could have said “no,” and you’d have been none the wiser.
However, Centocor… Well, I know only a little about J&J, but I am reasonably familiar with the Worshipful Company’s marketing methods, in general. You may recall that several companies are being pursued in the courts by many states for off-label marketing, concerning antipsychotics. No, the issue isn’t limited to SSRIs, but that’s where it touched me, so that’s my starting point. As I researched this matter, I became more familiar with the operation of the wider industry. It’s not pretty.
Nathan, do me a favour, and don’t invalidate my experience. Not even indirectly. OK? When the Worshipful Company is capable of doing other than blaming patients (for experiencing side effects), whistleblowers (for disloyalty, presumably), and the media (for “irresponsibly” reporting on the blowing of whistles), then I’ll feel more comfortable. As it stands, the standard response is to “manage” bad publicity (which often involves discrediting and intimidation). Tell your colleagues to grow the fuck up, will you? This isn’t a game, to some of us.
Matt
Matthew Holford
Oh, and a (cheap) parting shot from me, although not directly related to marketing. If you can get Eli to apologize for its collusion in MKULTRA, then I’ll consider the possibility that it’s not still pushing shite on unsuspecting people, happy in the knowledge that those in the Establishment are either in collusion or so befuddled by the “science,” that they don’t question the lobbyists demands for pre-emption and the de-criminalization of off-label marketing.
The Worshipful Company is steadily removing people’s right to complain about its snake oil remedies. That may not be the intention, but it is the effect. However, it’s conduct doesn’t alter the fact that they are snake oil remedies.
Matt
Nathan
“However, it’s conduct doesn’t alter the fact that they are snake oil remedies.”
I don’t really know what you mean by this since you, in fact, take one of these “snake oil remedies”. I suppose you are using this phrase to mean pseudoscientific remedies like those marketed by the homeopathic “companies”. There are actually quite a few effective snake antivenoms, but I guess that is not really your point…
And what is the deal with you calling pharmaceutical companies “The Worshipful Company”? It sounds rather silly to me.
Now, on to your experience: When has the company blamed YOU for side effects? I hear this all the time from you, Lisa, and Truthman. I don’t see how this is possible since the side effects are clearly listed in the information included with the drug. Granted, doctors should go over the side effects more clearly with patients. Just by absolving itself of blame does not mean they are blaming you. There isn’t always someone to blame for the shit that happens in life. From your writing I gather you are not American — but you certainly seem to have the good-old American attitude: Someone must be blamed and (if possible) sued for any negative things that happen to me.
Drugs will always help some people and hurt some people. It’s up to the government agencies involved to decide if the benifit gained by the many is worth the harm caused the few. You are welcome to sue your local governmental regulatory body for approving such medication — but quit always blaming the pharma companies. We provide a service that comes with a risk. We’ve never said otherwise.
truthman
“We provide a service that comes with a risk. We’ve never said otherwise” says nathan..
Yeah.. Well , unfortunately those who took Vioxx, Avandia, Paxil, Zyprexa etc were not forewarned of the risks Nathan.. That is the point, it’s ok to talk abour risks when pharma discloses the risks, but it doesn’t most of the time.. (and the irony is , it usually takes a Lawsuit for the real risks to be unearthed)
You just don’t get it Nathan..
People are angry because your pharmaceutical industry is the most greedy and corrupt industry in the world…
People are sick and tired of defective drugs being approved and prescribed, of Pharmas aggressive sales tactics , bribing of doctors and psychiatrists, lying about the efficacy of drugs, inflating the effectiveness by skewing clinical trial results, exploiting developing nations , infiltrating patient groups, denying risks when people are dropping dead like flies, unethical practices, delaying generics, encouraging off label prescribing, conflicts of interest..
Need i go on?…
If you can’t understand why people are angry and Pissed off at the pharmaceutical industry then you need to wake up Nathan..
Matthew Holford
Nathan wrote:
“…When has the company blamed YOU for side effects?..”
The Worshipful Company [of Apothecaries] has been so-named (by me), because behaves like a not-so-secretive Guilded Company. As for the “blaming,” well perhaps that’s a poor choice of language. However, our experiences are routinely invalidated when we are told that the side effects we experience are consequent to our condition, whether that be by doctors, regulator or the companies themselves.
The effect, however, is much the same: we are required to bear the responsibility for the side effects that we experience. I agree that side effects are listed on the PIL, (indeed, my quack brought my attention to the suicide thing), but you try experiencing any of those side effects, and see what happens.
You provide a service that comes with a risk? The risk being that if one complains about the shoddy practices, one runs the risk that one will be stonewalled, thus invalidating what one has experienced? That, Nathan, is even more damaging than the snake oil remedies themselves. If you’d actually paid attention to the information that you were being given, rather than protecting your profit margins, you might be closer to some real scientific truths, by now.
Matt
Matthew Holford
Nathan wrote:
“…From your writing I gather you are not American — but you certainly seem to have the good-old American attitude: Someone must be blamed and (if possible) sued for any negative things that happen to me…”
This isn’t about blame, Nathan. I, for one, am well past the stage when I have any interest in the civil justice system. Incidentally, while you continue to insist that the Worshipful Company is excellent, we shall simply point out that it is crap. The “truth” may be somewhere in the middle (ie, it’s mediocre, and as corrupt as any other big business), but what the hell, eh? We can have a few laughs as we engage in a non-existent dialogue, which involves quite deliberately ignoring pertinent questions and key points that the other makes.
What you have just told me, Nathan, is that what happened is acceptable, within the system as it operates, at present. That’s not fucking good enough, for me. And it shouldn’t be for you, either. It is my position that I was failed at every level, and nobody wishes to address this particular customer complaint. That makes your industry shit, however you choose to justify it, and however it is defended by those with vested interests.
Matt