Merck Runs A Gardasil Special For Docs
4 CommentsBy Ed Silverman // August 19th, 2008 // 2:18 pm
As Gardasil revenue disappoints, the drugmaker is scrambling for ways to boost (pun intended) sales of the controversial HPV vaccine. So Merck is now promising docs a free replacement dosage if an insurer refuses coverage, according to Maggie McGlynn, who heads Merck’s vaccines business and mentioned the effort during a conference call with institutional investors arranged by Deutsche Bank today.
Unfortunately for Merck, too many docs have been asking their patients to first check with their health insurers to see if the shots would be covered. As you can imagine, this led to fewer shots.
So McGlynn told the crowd that by having the replacement program, “they will convert to same-day vaccination.” However, this only applies to women between 19 and 26 years old, since younger women and girls can get vaccinated through government-funded programs. The stipulation also extends only to those with private health insurance. You can read the terms right here.
Given the insurance hurdles and controversy over side effects, we wonder why Merck didn’t bring back the Gardasil beach tower at the start of summer to generate some interest.
Paul G
Sounds like a fair deal to me.
Doc
Merck’s Guardisil strategy form article in NYTs.
“Merck lobbied every opinion leader, women’s group, medical society, politicians, and went directly to the people — it created a sense of panic that says you have to have this vaccine now.”
Dr. Diane Harper, a professor of medicine at Dartmouth Medical School
Justice in Michigan
It’s a pretty solid article. Diane Harper has been a critic of Merck’s Gardasil marketing/lobbying for some time.
As an interesting political twist, in Michigan, as in many other states, it was mainly the liberal, Democratics in the stae legislature who were pushing for mandating the vaccine. The opposition came largely from “social issue” and libertarian conservatives who were concerned, among other things, with impact on teen sexuality as well as parental/individual rights.
Personally, I found myself allied with the side that I am normally not (they also have been many of those who have defended our 12-year preempion law which 70% of voters reject). Mandated vaccination came within, literally, minutes of passing in the state legislature. The vote was postponed mainly for technical reasons.
When the legislature reconvened, a few months later, things looked somewhat differently.
Ed Silverman
Hi Doc,
Dartmouth’s Diane Harper has been outspoken about Gardasil for quite some time. You can read her remarks from last year right here…
http://www.pharmalot.com/2007/03/gardasil_researchers_in_their/
And here’s something from Merck’s Maggie McGlynn on the lobbying…
http://www.pharmalot.com/2007/10/merck-exec-mandating-gardasil-wasnt-a-strategy/
And here’s some background on the effect the lobbying had…
http://www.pharmalot.com/2007/03/maine_lawmaker_exits_women_in/
Cheers
ed