Today in Medicine: US Congress Hears Pros and Cons of Pharmaceutical Company Relationships with Physicians

June 28th, 2007 By Alexandra Almonacid M.D. [mailto:aalmonacid@partners.org]

Washington DC, USA: Investigation into the complex relationships between the pharmaceutical industry and physicians was held in a hearing yesterday by the U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging.

Dr. Jerome Kassirer,  former Editor-in-Chief of the New England Journal of Medicine and Professor of Medicine at Tufts University School of Medicine testified that  “ pharmaceutical companies require big profits and to do so they mount massive marketing campaigns, much of it directed at doctors. And doctors are human, and like the rest of us they respond to financial incentives”. Kassirer recommended that “industry-paid gifts and meals be eliminated; that faculty should not join industry speaker’s bureaus, that all faculty consulting with industry be strictly overseen by contract, that drug formulary committees be free of conflicted physicians, and that free drug samples be regulated by a voucher system.”

Although leading medical centers, such as Stanford, Penn, Yale, and UC Davis have revised their policies, Kassirer said that “most have ‘picked off the low-hanging fruit,’ proscribing visits by drug reps and eliminating industry-supported meals. None has eliminated faculty involvement on speaker’s bureaus or consultations on marketing issues.”

In an opposing view, a senior official in the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA), Marjorie Powell, argued that pharmaceutical companies have a mission to keep doctors well informed  “The role of pharmaceutical promotion is to educate health care professionals on the latest, most accurate information available regarding prescription medicines, which play an ever increasing role in healthcare.”

To view the hearing click