As reported in today's New York Times,
"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."
The article is well-balanced, including commentary from those who believe such gifts are benign as well as those who believe they contribute to undue influence on doctors' prescription decisions.
Research suggests that doctors worldwide (including in the developing world) are influenced not only by the monetary value of the gifts bestowed upon them, but also subliminally by the pervasiveness of logos and branding, such that they often don't even realize that they are making prescription decisions as a result of aggressive marketing, rather than on the basis of scientific knowledge and sound reasoning.
Again, this is a worldwide problem: A 2004 study of the advertising material and marketing brochures sent out by drug companies in Germany found that "about 94% of the information in them has no basis in scientific evidence."
More on this: here and here.
The role of marketing and branding in medicine also touches on several other issues, including the role of the doctor vis-à-vis not only the drug companies, but also vis-à-vis the patient; the alleged overmedicalization of many ailments today; and the relationship between the cost of a medicine/treatment and its availability to those who might benefit from it (not always an easy, let alone consistent, relationship to tease apart).
As patients, our job is to educate ourselves about the medicines and treatments we are recommended before we agree to them, to the extent possible. Clearly however, in the case of a serious medical condition that must be treated immediately (or where our prognosis is improved the sooner we begin treatment), patients understandably shift to their physician a fair amount of the burden for determining the best course of action.
I am reminded of a conversation I had with my friend Michael Short the other day. We were talking about the banking industry and the proper role of regulation in that arena.
I may write more about the current financial crisis some other time, but what struck me most about both that crisis and the perhaps seemingly unrelated issue of regulation of pharmaceutical companies and doctors, is that both situations are compounded - indeed, it might even be argued that they are a result of - globalization and increased interdependence in today's world, as well as by the largely unfettered rise of the multi-national corporation.
**********
As another year draws to a close, I think of all my family and friends near and far, and about how blessed we are (if we only see it that way) to live in a world that continually gets smaller and smaller (thanks in no small part to technology). Issues of sovereignty, and the conflict between the human rights and civil rights of individuals and the legal personhood and rights of corporations show no sign of disappearing, but with that comes a tremendous opportunity for synergy, innovation, solutions to global problems like starvation and poverty (to name just two), and last but not least, personal growth and transformation.
As we say goodbye to 2008 and hello to 2009 I relish the opportunity to learn from all of our relations and every situation I am presented with in life. The world continues to get more complicated, but in that complex interplay of situations and interests lies the greatest potential for creativity and true abundance.
This year, I particularly thank Michael Short for teaching me how to focus on abundance (rather than scarcity), and Jonathan Patrizio for his guidance in learning how to live in the moment.
Love, peace, prosperity and light to all! :-)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment