Comments on: UK Drugmakers Unveil A New Code Of Conduct http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/05/uk-drugmakers-unveil-a-new-code-of-conduct/ News, Comment and Conversation Fri, 10 Feb 2012 20:30:48 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2 By: truthman30 http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/05/uk-drugmakers-unveil-a-new-code-of-conduct/#comment-356508 truthman30 Sun, 11 May 2008 04:31:31 +0000 http://www.pharmalot.com/?p=13555#comment-356508 UK drug makers unveil new code of conduct.. Did anyone care to mention the issue of ethic as part of this proposed new code?... UK drug makers unveil new code of conduct..

Did anyone care to mention the issue of ethic as part of this proposed new code?…

]]> By: Bob Freeman http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/05/uk-drugmakers-unveil-a-new-code-of-conduct/#comment-356503 Bob Freeman Sun, 11 May 2008 02:26:28 +0000 http://www.pharmalot.com/?p=13555#comment-356503 Matthew, I defer to your experience and judgement. I'm not following the UK and ABPI closely as I once did. I appreciate the comments and will find time to try to catch up. From my own experience, affiliates often pursue their own agendas especially in marketing practices. That statement does not, of course, condone fraudulent or unethical behavior. Matthew, I defer to your experience and judgement. I’m not following the UK and ABPI closely as I once did. I appreciate the comments and will find time to try to catch up.

From my own experience, affiliates often pursue their own agendas especially in marketing practices. That statement does not, of course, condone fraudulent or unethical behavior.

]]> By: Matthew Holford http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/05/uk-drugmakers-unveil-a-new-code-of-conduct/#comment-356497 Matthew Holford Sun, 11 May 2008 01:39:44 +0000 http://www.pharmalot.com/?p=13555#comment-356497 Bob, as you say: everything's relative. We have several quite high-profile cases within the past few years (I'm thinking Vioxx, Avandia and Seroxat, and I don't doubt that I could find others, if I chose), where manufacturers have withheld data from consumers, knowing that their drugs had the potential to do damage to patients. Public censure is nothing, in these instances, and quite clearly has absolutely no impact on the way the companies do business, which, to quote the Senate Finance Committee's report into the intimidation of John Buse is "less than stellar. People such as Garnier will still be invited to advise Texture and Shrub, when they should be very explicitly shown the window seat. Bob, they are doing precisely the opposite of what they say they're doing, and there is no excuse for that, however one dresses it up. Matt Bob, as you say: everything’s relative. We have several quite high-profile cases within the past few years (I’m thinking Vioxx, Avandia and Seroxat, and I don’t doubt that I could find others, if I chose), where manufacturers have withheld data from consumers, knowing that their drugs had the potential to do damage to patients.

Public censure is nothing, in these instances, and quite clearly has absolutely no impact on the way the companies do business, which, to quote the Senate Finance Committee’s report into the intimidation of John Buse is “less than stellar. People such as Garnier will still be invited to advise Texture and Shrub, when they should be very explicitly shown the window seat. Bob, they are doing precisely the opposite of what they say they’re doing, and there is no excuse for that, however one dresses it up.

Matt

]]> By: Bob Freeman http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/05/uk-drugmakers-unveil-a-new-code-of-conduct/#comment-356490 Bob Freeman Sat, 10 May 2008 20:17:31 +0000 http://www.pharmalot.com/?p=13555#comment-356490 Matthew, everything is relative, I suppose. Over the years I've been far more impressed with the ABPI and its member firms than I have with PhRMA. Back some years ago I was in corporate when our UK affiliate ran afoul of ABPI's marketing code and, if nothing else, it is quite embarassing to be called out publicly. (Our affiliate ran some print ads stressing cost-effectiveness and that violated an agreement that cost/price was not a proper promotion. Those were pre-NICE days obviously) Yes, ABPI does lobby but that's what all trade associations do, and, again, it's not as excessive as PhRMA's in my opinion. Matthew, everything is relative, I suppose. Over the years I’ve been far more impressed with the ABPI and its member firms than I have with PhRMA. Back some years ago I was in corporate when our UK affiliate ran afoul of ABPI’s marketing code and, if nothing else, it is quite embarassing to be called out publicly. (Our affiliate ran some print ads stressing cost-effectiveness and that violated an agreement that cost/price was not a proper promotion. Those were pre-NICE days obviously)

Yes, ABPI does lobby but that’s what all trade associations do, and, again, it’s not as excessive as PhRMA’s in my opinion.

]]> By: Matthew Holford http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/05/uk-drugmakers-unveil-a-new-code-of-conduct/#comment-356488 Matthew Holford Sat, 10 May 2008 19:19:40 +0000 http://www.pharmalot.com/?p=13555#comment-356488 The ABPI has had a marketing code in place for some years, but I think one should remember that the ABPI is not a regulator - it represents the interests of the industry (eg, it "lobbies" NICE, when NICE isn't, as far as the industry is concerned). Similarly, the UK press has a code of conduct, which relates to respecting privacy, and whatnot, but sanctions are limited to public censure, and as far as I know, the ABPI is the same. The things that ABPI has implemented, here, sound good, but my reaction is guarded, to say the least - whomever pays the piper, and all that. Also, as we saw recently, the industry has scant regard for patient safety, even if it is assessed to have operated within the letter of the Law (I'm talking about GSK, again). Ultimately, it is the industry's attitude to this factor that will dictate its conduct, not ABPI codes, I think. Matt The ABPI has had a marketing code in place for some years, but I think one should remember that the ABPI is not a regulator - it represents the interests of the industry (eg, it “lobbies” NICE, when NICE isn’t, as far as the industry is concerned). Similarly, the UK press has a code of conduct, which relates to respecting privacy, and whatnot, but sanctions are limited to public censure, and as far as I know, the ABPI is the same.

The things that ABPI has implemented, here, sound good, but my reaction is guarded, to say the least - whomever pays the piper, and all that. Also, as we saw recently, the industry has scant regard for patient safety, even if it is assessed to have operated within the letter of the Law (I’m talking about GSK, again). Ultimately, it is the industry’s attitude to this factor that will dictate its conduct, not ABPI codes, I think.

Matt

]]>