What Docs Think Of Pharma & Where They Get Info
16 CommentsBy Ed Silverman // June 30th, 2011 // 8:56 am
As they say, every little bit counts. And so drugmakers may be heartened to hear that the perception held by physicians of the pharmaceutical industry has actually improved this year - 58 percent of docs say they have a somewhat positive or extremely positive overall impression. This is, however, up just 2 points from last year. But this is also the first time since 2004 that a positive impression increased.
Consumers, on the other hand, are heading in other direction - 46 percent have an extremely or somewhat negative impression this year, up 1 point from last year. Overall, one could argue the bottom line tallies for both groups is largely static, although perhaps docs are most sensitive to new approval and R&D issues, while consumers tend to focus on safety and price. The responses are from a survey of 6,434 docs and 2,008 consumers by SDI, the market research firm.
Of course, physicians have much more interaction with the pharmaceutical industry. And so they were also asked where they get their info on drugs. The two sources cited most often may be considered predictable - 72 percent say medical conferences, symposia and group meetings that are sponsored by medical organizations, inching out medical journal articles, which were named by 71 percent.
Meanwhile, 45 percent ask other docs and 44 percent look at reference books or ask sales reps; 41 percent pointed to medical meetings and symposia sponsored by drugmakers, 36 percent cited the Internet and 34 percent say they look at material from drugmakers. Just 10 percent cited patients and only 7 percent listed news media (hmmm….).
Who and what do docs rely on, though, when its comes to the cost of a drug? Well, 64 percent point to pharmacists and 56 say sales reps, inching out the 55 percent who cite their own patients. Half ask other docs, 47 percent cite continuing medical education and 44 percent rely on the Internet. Only 41 percent ask an HMO or preferred provider organization.
Ron
Perhaps one reason for the negative view is the minding, and mind-numbing parade of psychopharm. ads on TV. Endless mumbles of dangerous side effects as the pictures shows people looking sad, or happy, as the case may be.
Americans may be dumb in a general sense, but the overall mistrust of this industry deserves to grow, unless and until there is behavior change.
Pharma as snake oil earns its own reputation, daily.
Basel lair
Can you say OIL industry, how about BANKS, maybe USED CARS sales, etc etc? This is where Bigpharma\’s reputation belongs as far as consumers are concerned. Spent 35 years in this biz and not surprised at all. What also would not surprise, that someone from those \"hated\" industries gets offended by bigpharma being lumped with them.
Challenge: try to find another industry that paid well over $25.000.000.000.00 in fines for nasty/illegal beahviour in the last 20 years?
Mark
As with everything, there are are two sides to the story. Let’s not forget that these ” Bad Pharma” companies that you’re talking about are the reason behind increasing the life expectancy related to many fatal disease! Look at how cancer is treated today or how cholesterol reduction reduced heart attacks…etc
Dr. Ben A. Drill
Touche Mark!!!!
original industry insider
Ron, the following PT Barnum quotes sustain the pharmaceutical industry. Take your pick (hint, morte than one answer is acceptable).
- “There’s a sucker born every minute”
- “Without promotion something terrible happens… Nothing!
- “Money is a terrible master but an excellent servant”
-”Engage in one kind of business only, and stick to it faithfully until you succeed, or until your experience shows that you should abandon it.”
-”Men who drive sharp bargains with their customers, acting as if they never expected to see them again, will not be mistaken. They will never see them again as customers. People don’t like to pay and get kicked also.”
-”Nobody ever lost a dollar by underestimating the taste of the American public.”
-”Never give a sucker an even break.”
Evelyn Pringle
I wouldn’t rule out the possibility that the majority of doctors surveyed were on some drug company payroll.
I would also have to disagree with Mark’s comments above. Had I remained on the miracle drug Lipitor back in 2001, I’d be dead, or at least crippled by now, due to the failure to warn about it’s known side effects.
As for treating cancer, I’ll bet there is a cure out there, or at least some far better treatments, but the chemo-radiation research and treatment cartel is keeping them off the market.
The medical profession in this country is infected by greed and Pharma money is the leading cause.
Basel lair
Agree with Evelyn (we exchanged few emails some time ago) and will tell this to Mark. Yes the bigpharma does lot of good, but also the bad and the ugly. Some of their drugs have been \"lifesavers\" but others not so. Even that is fine. But what is not fine that they use the bad and the ugly in their operations because they thing they have every right to do this because they are so \"important\" in saving us from disease and premature death. So they sell us BAD drugs that do not work as promised and on top they dno\’t disclose the side effect that kill they know of. So they use UGLY ways promote their drugs; offlabel, corrupt the doctors by using bribe and who knows what else, lie to everyone, use fake trials to sell their drugs etc etc.It is an endless manue of unethical and illegal activity they do deberately and with precise plans to enhance their already huge profits. This they think they deserve to do because \"we save your lives\" so ST$U and like it.
By the way you don\’t see our haroic farmers behaving the same because \"we feed you thus sustain your lives\". There are other expamples but not many amongst the big biz, for bigpharma is not the only one \"behaving badly\" but they are the worse due to the fact explained above.
cliffintokyo
With all the current ‘media spotlighting’, its not surprising that docs have an expectation that pharma has cleaned up its act to some extent. Public perception seems to be lagging though.
Those percentages in your last paragraph tend to encourage me in my belief that docs need to be excellent communicators to be able to do their job well (patients, other docs, etc). Not so sure about their scientific zeal though, judging by those percentages in the penultimate paragraph.
gia
I agree with Mark
Salient point
Evelyn-Why on earth would a pharmaceutical company keep an effective cancer med off the market? Because they don\’t feel like making money? Because they make so much off \"chemo-radiation\"?
This is a fairly outrageous claim.
Doc
The single biggest factor to increased life span was the invention of anti-biotics, now a distained area of R&D because there is not enough money in it.
So in our life time, we will see a major Federal Govt R&D initiative in anti-infectives. Pharma is all for cures as long as their profit margin is large enough, if not forget it.
Go ahead and tell me it’s a business - I know.
You tell me if this is rational:
50 Levaquin (brand name) ~ $820
50 Levaquin (generic) ~ $14 (and still profitable)
That brand name margin is funding more than basic R&D and FDA approval processes.
Doc
Good article for all the R&D “cost” kool aid drinkers.
http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2011/06/20116297573191484.html
PharmD-ID
Doc - the problem with the lack of new antibiotics lies entirely with ID docs and my friends in pharmacy. Why would a pharma company invest years and money into a novel antibiotic when pharmacy and ID will restricts it\’s use. We run cost containment programs that we call stewardship programs. Instead, churn out another PPI or statin and make a few billion.
MDs, PharmDs, and the C-Suite are to blame. Not pharma.
We are getting ready to change as we are going ACO, but the rank and file still view antibiotics on cost, not CE outcomes, pharmacoeconomic outcomes or mortality. Up front cost.
neeraj rawat
i think the reputation of pharmaeutical industry is on stake as its public image is degrading day by day with lots of generic players are coming in the market which only play with the price factor and having no scientific discussion with doc its become a fish market now. pharma companies need to take some sort of action to review it social image.
Margaret Sullivan
Three comments:
1. To those who argue for Big Pharma’s “good drugs,” the old adage can be modified “Two wrongs don’t make one right righteous.” A company should not get away with hurting some people because it has helped other people in some other arena.
2. A much neglected area, especially in terms of psychiatric drugs, are the potentially horrible “discontinuation syndromes” when people try to come off these drugs. Look at some of the posting boards for getting off a psychiatric drug (e.g., “seroquel withdrawal topix”) before you ever agree to take it. The withdrawal issue reminds me of the people who used to work for “the company” but were required to buy all their food and supplies from the “company store”–hard not to make money off a drug that people are afraid to come off of because of the withdrawal involved (and I am talking about drugs legally prescribed by competent MDs.
3. Doctors need to start doing their own literature searches, particularly those of “consumers,” and stop relying on each other and Big Pharma. Or, perhaps they should ask themselves how much research they would do before they themselves ingested a particular drug. Just because the FDA doesn’t do its job is no excuse for doctors to keep prescribing drugs (yes, I know managed care does not allow them time for such research but they need to be reminded of the Hippocratic Oath part about “At least do no harm.”
Enough of my rant. I think most of us who are not critically ill or in need of legitimate vaccinations or antibiotics (and these are the true exceptions)should turn to medication as a last resort.
This comes not from an “intellectual” standpoint but from multiple bad experiences with prescription drugs that I have now had time (and energy) to reflect upon. 90% have not helped and 60% have hurt.
There’s something wrong with the system.
Nadeem
I completely have the same opinion with what Margaret has said. There is no doubt that pharmaceutical industry has helped the humanity in more than one way. Just to recall how patients were treated in ancient times….. its awfully horrible and frightening but thanks to the advent of modernized drugs there is a marked decline in morbidity and mortality of major diseases. Apart from these services they have caused much damage to the humanity through different negative tactics like fabricated trials, influence on the study results and of course ever souring prices of lifesaving drugs which is definitely deplorable.