corner
Healthy Skepticism
Join us to help reduce harm from misleading health information.
Increase font size   Decrease font size   Print-friendly view   Print
Register Log in

Healthy Skepticism Library item: 16513

Warning: This library includes all items relevant to health product marketing that we are aware of regardless of quality. Often we do not agree with all or part of the contents.

 

Publication type: news

Editorial
Bad Medicine
St Petersburg Times (Florida, USA) 2009 Sep 22
http://www.tampabay.com/opinion/editorials/bad-medicine/1038063


Full text:

It’s now clear that the pharmaceutical industry that claims its goal is to improve lives is just as likely as any other industry to manipulate the truth to make a buck. Even more disturbing: Drug companies have found a stable of doctors willing to help them in exchange for cash or prestige. Doctors should know better, particularly those affiliated with medical schools, and the medical schools should adopt stricter rules.

Recent disclosures, forced by court cases or federal regulators, have laid bare the complicity of doctors, including some in Tampa Bay, in helping drug companies sell their products. Experts estimate for each $1 spent on such marketing, companies reap $12 in increased prescription sales. When doctors receive thousands of dollars from drugmakers to help deliver their message, it creates an inherent conflict of interest with their primary job: Caring for their patients. Medical schools should be attacking this ethical problem directly, particular in an era when costs are leaving many uninsured.

Some schools, such as Harvard and Stanford, have banned the lucrative relationships. Short of that, medical schools should at least require strict reporting and public disclosure, with serious consequences for lapses. That hasn’t been the case in the past at the University of South Florida College of Medicine.

The St. Petersburg Times’ Kris Hundley reported on Sunday how drugmaker Wyeth for years paid for and influenced the ghostwriting of medical journal articles and continuing education conferences in an effort to boost sales of its hormone treatments for menopause. The campaign continued even after a federal study indicated the drugs might make it harder to detect breast cancer in patients. Dr. James Fiorica, then a professor at USF and head of the gynecologic oncology program at H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center, was among those who participated. He chaired a Wyeth-backed conference and signed his name to two ghostwritten articles. He, like other doctors earning money from pharmaceutical companies, said he never signed his name to a position he couldn’t scientifically defend.

And last month, Hundley wrote about Eli Lilly & Co.‘s program that paid physicians tens of millions of dollars in the first quarter of this year to talk about its drugs. One of Lilly’s highest paid physicians and its top earner in the Tampa Bay area is Dr. Maria-Carmen Wilson, a neurologist and USF professor who is director of Tampa General Hospital’s Headache & Pain Center. She was paid $54,400 in the first quarter of the year for speaking with fellow doctors about Lilly’s Cymbalta drug on 27 occasions. Wilson reached Lilly’s annual cap of $75,000 in May.

Nonetheless, Wilson failed to follow USF policy to get prior approval before making presentations on behalf of a drugmaker. Wilson also failed to inform USF when she took free trips to Scotland and Spain for drugmaker Astra-Zeneca. Last month, USF approved Wilson’s Lilly activities retroactively.

Another USF-affiliated physician, Dr. Brian Keefe, also failed to disclose earning $15,000 from Lilly in the first quarter.

In April, USF medical school announced new reporting guidelines for interactions between faculty and drug- and medical device makers. But it seems the message has not gotten through, and faculty who ignore the rules are retroactively given a pass.

USF’s answer is that more clarity is coming. Dr. Stephen K. Klasko, CEO for USF Health and dean of the College of Medicine, says he has convened a group to look at all faculty relationships with pharmaceutical companies in order to make new rules and reporting requirements “as simple and as consistently enforceable and as clear as possible.”

“We’re going to have a zero tolerance policy,” Klasko says.

That can’t happen soon enough. Patients rely on doctors to give them the best treatment possible, not just the treatment they’re paid to support.

 

  Healthy Skepticism on RSS   Healthy Skepticism on Facebook   Healthy Skepticism on Twitter

Please
Click to Register

(read more)

then
Click to Log in
for free access to more features of this website.

Forgot your username or password?

You are invited to
apply for membership
of Healthy Skepticism,
if you support our aims.

Pay a subscription

Support our work with a donation

Buy Healthy Skepticism T Shirts


If there is something you don't like, please tell us. If you like our work, please tell others.

Email a Friend








Far too large a section of the treatment of disease is to-day controlled by the big manufacturing pharmacists, who have enslaved us in a plausible pseudo-science...
The blind faith which some men have in medicines illustrates too often the greatest of all human capacities - the capacity for self deception...
Some one will say, Is this all your science has to tell us? Is this the outcome of decades of good clinical work, of patient study of the disease, of anxious trial in such good faith of so many drugs? Give us back the childlike trust of the fathers in antimony and in the lancet rather than this cold nihilism. Not at all! Let us accept the truth, however unpleasant it may be, and with the death rate staring us in the face, let us not be deceived with vain fancies...
we need a stern, iconoclastic spirit which leads, not to nihilism, but to an active skepticism - not the passive skepticism, born of despair, but the active skepticism born of a knowledge that recognizes its limitations and knows full well that only in this attitude of mind can true progress be made.
- William Osler 1909