Healthy Skepticism Library item: 13281
Warning: This library includes all items relevant to health product marketing that we are aware of regardless of quality. Often we do not agree with all or part of the contents.
Publication type: news
Silverman E.
Dear Doctor: A Union Shills For Pfizer And Lipitor
Pharmalot 2008 Mar 24
http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/03/a-union-shills-for-pfizer-and-lipitor/#more-12682
Full text:
File this under creative marketing. A union that represents about 50,000 emergency medical technicians and paramedics recently mailed a letter to its “approved physician network” endorsing the use of Pfizer’s Lipitor cholesterol pill. The letter isn’t dated, but does a carry a Pfizer trademark for 2007.
“When appropriate, we ask that you please consider an agent like Lipitor for our members with high cholesterol or without clinically evidence CHD,” or coronary heart disease, read the letter, which was signed by Matthew Levy of the IAEP, or International Association of EMTs and Paramedics. “IAEP leadership stands behind Lipitor as the lipid-lowering agent of choice when it is prescribed by a physician. This confidence in Lipitor is based on its proven efficacy and is supported by its vast clinical experience of more than 15 years.” This is the letter.
One doctor who recently received the letter – and shared it with us – says the effort raises questions about the union’s motives and qualifications to involve itself in medical decisions. “I’ve never had an experience where a union says one drug is better than another,” Alicia Fernandez, an associate professor of clinical medicine at UCSF/San Francisco General Hospital, tells Pharmalot. “I don’t think unions necessarily have the medical expertise to make such a suggestion. And I think it’s unusual for a union to appear to be working on behalf of a particular drug.”
We left messages for Levy, but he hasn’t responded. An IAEP spokeswoman tells us that “a division head sent it out without prior approval of the national president. It was inappropriate. It was not approved and a policy was put in place to ensure it never happens again. A division head sent it out without prior approval of the national president. We don’t endorse any particular drug.”
But why was the letter sent out in the first place? And was any further action taken? She wouldn’t say. She did say that IAEP members obtain their prescription-drug coverage through their local employers. But she declined to comment on whether there was any arrangement – financial or otherwise – between the IAEP and Pfizer. She also described Levy as a division head, although he’s generally referred to as a national organizer on the IAEP web site and works out of the union’s Quincy, Massachusetts, headquarters.
It appears, however, that IAEP may have instituted its new policy in response to questions. This episode was first reported late last week by the Health Beat Blog last week and Fernandez received the letter earlier this month, suggesting the letter may have been mailed to an untold number of doctors for several weeks. Of course, this is a plus for Pfizer, which needs to generate as much revenue as possible from Lipitor, a best-selling pill that is under pressure. We have written a Pfizer spokesman and will update you with any reply.
