To Lehman Brothers, Linens 'n Things and the blank VHS tape, add another American institution that expired in 2008: drug company trinkets.
Starting Jan. 1, the pharmaceutical industry has agreed to a voluntary moratorium on the kind of branded goodies -- Viagra pens, Zoloft soap dispensers, Lipitor mugs -- that were meant to foster good will and, some would say, encourage doctors to prescribe more of the drugs.
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
There is a happy medium somewhere in all of this. But the bottom line is ... if a physician can be bought with pens and pads, free meals, trips, etc. it's the physicians who need to be regulated.
As someone already stated, they pay more for advertising than research and development. Why advertise to the public when any reputable Doctor is the one that prescribes the drugs? Everybody gets all over the oil companies for making a 10% profit, but pharmaceutical companies pull in 19% or more, and no one gripes! Most new drugs don`t come from the drug companies, they come from research outfits, universities, etc. They get a grant from Big Pharm, even the government, but the big money goes to the sellers of the drugs, not the inventors. And they don`t want you to buy from Canada, even though those drugs are made in the same factory, probably in Scotland, as the ones sold here for 40% more!
Ok, this story is old news. Since the excesses of the late nineties, the drug companies were warned to police themselves or the government would. TAP Pharmaceuticals is a great example. Gone are the paid vacations to physicians and other such devices. Now as things move further down the pipe, the pharma companies are getting rid of more of the marketing material to non-relevant players.
In the end, physicians no longer make many of the decisions on medicines. It is made by HMO's through what products they are willing to put on their formularies.
I always love the "may lead to death and other harmful side-effects" part of those commercials. My favorite is the one for the sleeping pill that "may cause drowsiness."
How in the world is that thing going to hold a couple of D size batteries.
So they realize that giving small gifts and toys to doctors don't work any more.
But, the lavish trips and banquets and compensations for lectures are still
very much in place. Perhaps with the money saved, they will come up with
even more effective advertisement next. This is really meaningless.
Who would use a Viagra pen?
Wouldn't that be the equivalent of advertising that you have erectile dysfunction?
A drug company who shall be nameless sent a rep to see me once with a giant plastic nose that dispensed tissues, labeled with their decongestant.
"Oh, thank God you're not from Pfizer!" said my receptionist.
"The guidelines, for example, still permit drug makers to underwrite free lunches for doctors and their staffs or to sponsor dinners for doctors at restaurants, as long as the meals are accompanied by educational presentations."
Would you rahter have a free lunch with a 10 minute speech (if that long) or an ink pen. GET REAL. I've seen some of those lunches being delivered.............pretty fancy spread.
The Free Lunch scene in the Doctor's office is absolutely obscene. The drug reps don't show up with a brown bag lunch. Porters arrive sometimes with cartloads of expensive brand named dinners. The odors wafting through the waiting room and corridors. The entire staff feel entitled to this daily free feeding frenzy. The left overs could feed a family for days . Those cheap pens which last a few days before running out or falling apart are so influential on prescribing habits!
What drug do I take to make 2008 go away a few hours faster?
This is a decent first step in controlling the advertising of prescription drugs. I"ve always hated seeing promotion crap with Big Pharm names on it. Now let's ban the television advertising. Patients don't need to "ask their doctor" if a drug is right for them. Their doctors are supposed to figure that out.
Typo in headline: "Pens" is missing a letter.
Peons. That be us. ;-)
Some marketing is necessary, including for new products. I would like to see a return to no TV ads to the general public. Of course, ending 'feee' meals, and so on would help too. Perhaps the State and Federal governments as well as the private insurance companies could tell the pharma companies that they will only pay a set price for drugs and devices without most of the marketing costs included.
Another trick the phama companies used in recent years is recruting for sales reps ex-college cheerleaders as their attractiveness and personalities often got the attention of the male doctors.
I remember an article in a newspaper a few years ago on the lawsuits about Vioxx and how the company spent over $250 MILLION in marketing costs in the 5 years it was out. All that for a drug that was a disaster. What if Billions were not spent for Viagria? Maybe it would be less expensive or that money could be used to offset research on more important drugs.
let me know when the physicians really grow a p@ir and stop with the incessant prescribing of pharmaceuticals.
Every person I know is on Cingular daily for everything from mild asthma to allergies to b00bjob recovery
I even saw a commercial for children's chewable Cingular.
And there won't be a generic available for 10 years.
That's $130 a month.
RIDICULOUS!
For once, we differrr.
A relative is on Singulair for asthma. Made a huge difference.
The issue re generics is a good reason why guvmint should be in the research biz, and companies then compete for licensing rights on the basis of production efficiencies.
I'm with you on the Singulair.....my sons and I take it for asthma and it helps. That patent is almost up; Singulair has been around for pretty closte to ten years. They may have gotten the 17 year patten, most companies don't go for that one as they use a subsidiary company to make the generic. Than they profit from both.
As soon as the patients stop getting sick, I promise to comply.
most folks I know are on cellular south... but it still costs the same and the generic versions don't have the network behind them.
This is a drop in the bucket. What REALLY needs to be done is that ALL ads for prescription drugs need to be pulled from TV, radio, print media and the internet. How much $$$ is added to the cost of prescription drugs to compensate for the BILLIONS spent on advertising something that we can't buy without a doctors prescription?
Doctors need to be educated on new prescription drugs, so they know what will help us. We don't need to be hammered over the head each and every day, about drugs we can't buy. If I have a health problem, I go to my doctor and tell him about it. It's HIS job - not mine, based on "brainwashing" TV ads - to determine what will help me get well. This system is really broken.
As a nurse, I totally agree with you.
This is the FIRST of many things that needs to be regulated to reign in the rape of the American people by big Pharma and the FIRST way to do that is to limit advertising to journals specifically aimed at the medical profession (JAMA, etc). Every time a legislator brings up regulation, Big Pharma whines about not having money to do research to find the next cure for cancer. From what I can see, there's not the money in curing cancer that there seems to be for inventing new conditions, syndromes and dysfunctions to prescribe medications to treat. Their threat not to do research is a bogus one, because research is the only way they can stay in business.
I'm no fan of big Pharma. That said, drugs are not going to come to market on their own. Pharmaceutical companies don't make drugs because they are humanitarians, they make them to earn a profit. Of course they advertise to physicians, of course they want us to prescribe their product. Bringing a drug to market can cost around $1 billion. It's not cheap.
Ask your doctor if [the following patent-protected product that just cost us a mint to get through the FDA] is right for you.
Well said!
Loading comments…
New York Times | NATASHA SINGER | December 31, 2008 07:44 AM