This is how smoking bans get bought by the drug companies that sell nicotine replacement products.
Gary K.


http://junkfoodscience.blogspot.com/2007/08/are-you-being-detailed.html

In case you missed it this week, the Los Angeles Times published a large special series on prescription drug marketing and its influence on consumers, doctors and researchers. Much of it was review, but it may be shocking news to many readers. And for everyone else, seeing it all together serves as a valuable reminder of the need to think critically about health information we hear, regardless of how trusting the source.

In 2006, drug-makers spent almost $5 billion to reach out to consumers with direct advertising. But ... an estimated $19 billion annually to woo doctors. They sponsor teaching programs and research at universities across the country, gaining goodwill along the way. They give money to patient groups. They hire public relations firms to share patient stories of illness and triumph....their efforts appear to be paying off. Americans filling a prescription choose brand-name products 37% of the time, even though three-quarters of all prescription drugs in the U.S. are available in cheaper generics.

The tactics used to “detail” (manipulate) doctors are eye-opening. The key, they said, is to build false friendships and convince doctors that the rep is the doctor’s best friend … and doctors are taken in.

A wonderful examination of the ethical issues raised in this paper, written by Dr. Roy M. Poses M.D. at Healthcare Renewal, is also worthwhile reading. [A well-known secret in the drug rep world are the benefits of certain physical attributes, medical expertise not required. Today, eDrugSearch shares an enlightening debate among female drug reps on cleavage.]

The LA Times also recognized that “outside the confines of a doctor’s office, pharmaceutical marketing efforts become more extravagant.”

Drug companies also score favor, spending $1.12 billion in 2005 just to fund medical education seminars:

Last October, the magazine New Scientist published a survey gauging the dependence of randomly selected U.S. patients' groups on drug manufacturers. Combing through the tax returns, annual reports and voluntary disclosures of 29 nonprofit patient-advocacy groups, the publication found that most accepted financial backing by companies developing or producing drugs used to treat patients supported by the group. In some groups, such as the American Heart Assn., the drug makers' financial backing was huge ($23 million in 2005)...

Regardless how anyone feels about drug company marketing, the bottom line is that it works, as the next article in the LA Times’ series revealed. Every dollar spent in medical journal advertising brings in $5 of sales, and every dollar spent on sponsoring a medical educational seminar nets $3.56. So, not surprising, companies are spending more than ever on marketing.

NOTE:Politicians are also part of this.
The drug industry, according to estimates by the Center for Public Integrity, has spent $758 million on lobbying — more than any other industry — since 1998.

How many doctors are critically looking at clinical practice guidelines, government agency and legislated mandates, and their own medical educations to see how heavily they’ve been domineered by pharmaceutical and other special interests?

I'll point out in relation to GKayser's post the film "Big Bucks, Big Pharma" which you can watch online for free.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=683998963000858...ype=search&plindex=0

The real problem is, most of our legislators are of an age when they are actually listening to their doctors. This is the time in their lives when they are convinced that health care will enable them to beat the odds and live forever. The legislators want research to continue so they will live forever at the government tit. The job pays well and the health care is the best anywhere. They also know, any member of the health care community can put an end to them in seconds and get away with it.

quote:

Originally posted by Bruce Fox:
The real problem is, most of our legislators are of an age when they are actually listening to their doctors. This is the time in their lives when they are convinced that health care will enable them to beat the odds and live forever.

That's a really good observation, Bruce. I never thought of that before. Thanks.

On a bell curve, I'm sure that most politicians are past middle age and this probably does significantly affect their psychology. I'm not a religious person myself, but it's also interesting to wonder if the decline in the role religion once played in American communities has contributed to this.