Once again the Times has pharma in the crosshairs

Mar/21/2007 02:46 Filed in: Pharma Business
body06_08
“When honest human beings have a vested stake in seeing the world in a particular way, they’re incapable of objectivity and independence,” said Max H. Bazerman, a professor at Harvard Business School. “A doctor who represents a pharmaceutical company will tend to see the data in a slightly more positive light and as a result will overprescribe that company’s drugs.” Such is a quote from a front page story in todays NY Times. I guess the Times would have us believe that physicians would gladly give talks and attend events without compensation. Now who is naive?


I have worked with a lot of physicians and I can tell you that for most of them unless there is some type of compensation for their time they don't want to get involved. Take online detailing for example, most research clearly shows that a majority of physicians will only participate in online detailing if there is some type of compensation involved. When we don't offer compensation the response rates are minimal.

Is the article one sided? Well look at this quote...

“Drug companies are like lions,” Dr. Grimm said of his sponsored talks. “For lions, it’s their nature to kill zebras and eat them. For drug companies, it’s their nature to make money. They’re not really trying to improve anybody’s health except if it makes them money.



So according to the NY Times they are to ask doctors to speak on their behalf about medications for no compensation. Drug companies have already stopped the practice of spending sprees on lavish resorts but the truth of the matter is that physicians want to hear from other physicians. Can they be impartial when they receive payments from pharma companies? My guess is no but don't you think that they have to believe in a product to pitch it or does the Times believe that all physicians are for sale?

|