Comments on: Pfizer Ending Support For CME By Third Parties http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/07/pfizer-ending-support-for-cme-by-third-parties/ News, Comment and Conversation Fri, 10 Feb 2012 20:51:00 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2 By: story http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/07/pfizer-ending-support-for-cme-by-third-parties/#comment-650056 story Mon, 05 Sep 2011 14:50:31 +0000 http://www.pharmalot.com/?p=14438#comment-650056 interesting... :) interesting… :)

]]> By: kristal swarovski http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/07/pfizer-ending-support-for-cme-by-third-parties/#comment-612828 kristal swarovski Fri, 25 Mar 2011 14:26:06 +0000 http://www.pharmalot.com/?p=14438#comment-612828 haha I thought that this article is in 2011.. :) haha I thought that this article is in 2011.. :)

]]> By: grosir aksesoris wanita http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/07/pfizer-ending-support-for-cme-by-third-parties/#comment-415005 grosir aksesoris wanita Fri, 31 Jul 2009 07:20:24 +0000 http://www.pharmalot.com/?p=14438#comment-415005 wow.. interesting wow.. interesting

]]> By: Paul G http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/07/pfizer-ending-support-for-cme-by-third-parties/#comment-365303 Paul G Wed, 02 Jul 2008 20:14:08 +0000 http://www.pharmalot.com/?p=14438#comment-365303 Read the fine print of the Pfizer statement... They may still support for-profit CME but indirectly. All they are doing is throwing it in the hands of academic departments to manage third parties. medical societies and schools are the worst at planning CME. Read the fine print of the Pfizer statement…

They may still support for-profit CME but indirectly. All they are doing is throwing it in the hands of academic departments to manage third parties. medical societies and schools are the worst at planning CME.

]]> By: Chris http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/07/pfizer-ending-support-for-cme-by-third-parties/#comment-365298 Chris Wed, 02 Jul 2008 19:27:50 +0000 http://www.pharmalot.com/?p=14438#comment-365298 > The association then pays the commercial co that provides the honoraria to the physician Pharma PR Hack - Honoraria should not be associated with CME programs (except for speaker honoraria), or am I missing something? > The association then pays the commercial co that provides the honoraria to the physician

Pharma PR Hack -
Honoraria should not be associated with CME programs (except for speaker honoraria), or am I missing something?

]]> By: Atlex http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/07/pfizer-ending-support-for-cme-by-third-parties/#comment-365294 Atlex Wed, 02 Jul 2008 19:03:17 +0000 http://www.pharmalot.com/?p=14438#comment-365294 Michael, Actually, for the industry as a whole, more than 50% of the dollars are already flowing through academic medical centers, professional organizations, etc. rather than Med-Ed companies. The trend away from Med-Ed companies began a few years ago. This move will simply speed up the trend. Atlex Michael,

Actually, for the industry as a whole, more than 50% of the dollars are already flowing through academic medical centers, professional organizations, etc. rather than Med-Ed companies. The trend away from Med-Ed companies began a few years ago. This move will simply speed up the trend.

Atlex

]]> By: Michael D http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/07/pfizer-ending-support-for-cme-by-third-parties/#comment-365291 Michael D Wed, 02 Jul 2008 18:33:31 +0000 http://www.pharmalot.com/?p=14438#comment-365291 It has always amazed me that the drug companies are willing to spend big bucks to support medical education via the Med-Ed companies but won't give a $5,000 grant to a university CME provider. Now I realize that the Med-Ed companies were merely an extention of the drug company while the univesity based CME providers wouldn't prostitute themselves. If this leads to the demise of the Med-Ed companies---good ridance. It has always amazed me that the drug companies are willing to spend big bucks to support medical education via the Med-Ed companies but won’t give a $5,000 grant to a university CME provider. Now I realize that the Med-Ed companies were merely an extention of the drug company while the univesity based CME providers wouldn’t prostitute themselves.

If this leads to the demise of the Med-Ed companies—good ridance.

]]> By: pharma PR hack http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/07/pfizer-ending-support-for-cme-by-third-parties/#comment-365272 pharma PR hack Wed, 02 Jul 2008 16:31:28 +0000 http://www.pharmalot.com/?p=14438#comment-365272 The net effect may be to actually make it harder to track conflict payments. Take for instance their current anti-smoking campaign of Med-ED for $4.3 million, with the money flowing from Pfizer to a physician association in the form of a lump sum grant. The association then pays the commercial co that provides the honoraria to the physician- the website tracking capability is gone away. Before you could track payments to titles to docs. There is no way for the public to know whether their doctor is a Pfizer consultant or really thinks Chantix is safe but overblown by media. It isn't the direct support that is under the public radar but the indirect that they are not stopping and will probably increase. The net effect may be to actually make it harder to track conflict payments. Take for instance their current anti-smoking campaign of Med-ED for $4.3 million, with the money flowing from Pfizer to a physician association in the form of a lump sum grant. The association then pays the commercial co that provides the honoraria to the physician- the website tracking capability is gone away. Before you could track payments to titles to docs. There is no way for the public to know whether their doctor is a Pfizer consultant or really thinks Chantix is safe but overblown by media. It isn’t the direct support that is under the public radar but the indirect that they are not stopping and will probably increase.

]]>