corner
Healthy Skepticism
Join us to help reduce harm from misleading health information.
Increase font size   Decrease font size   Print-friendly view   Print
Register Log in

Healthy Skepticism Library item: 13282

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.
Has The Medical Affairs Department Left Marketing?
Pharmalot 2008 Mar 24
http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/03/has-the-medical-affairs-department-left-marketing/


Full text:

A recent survey indicates that pharma’s medical affairs departments aren’t reporting to marketing as much as in the past, most likely due to compliance concerns. Back in 2002, 43 percent of the department were under the marketing roof, but this dropped to 7 percent this year, according to the Cutting Edge research firm, which queried 14 drugmakers, including Amgen, Glaxo, Bayer, Biogen Idec and Novartis.

Medical affairs, by the way, was defined as including these functions: thought leader development, MSL programs, medical publications, medical education, medical information, investigator-initiated, medical grants, advisory boards and advocacy, pharmacovigilance, patient assistance, Phase IV research, or clinical trials. Of course, some will argue these functions continue to serve marketing purposes only, such as medical science liaisons and patient assistance programs, and that organizational charts are merely window dressing.

The graph does leave one question unanswered – 43 percent of drugmakers shifted medical affairs to some undefined ‘other’ category, up from 22 percent. Unfortunately, Amanda Zuniga, Cutting Edge’s research analyst, tells us the firm didn’t learn the definition for the survey question that pertains to the graphic. “When we interviewed some of the participants they disclosed this ‘other’ as being a single medical platform,” she writes. “Some organizations have separate R&D branches and medical branches. Now, I can not say that this is true for the entire 43 percentof companies, but that is the case for some of the respondents.”

 

  Healthy Skepticism on RSS   Healthy Skepticism on Facebook   Healthy Skepticism on Twitter

Please
Click to Register

(read more)

then
Click to Log in
for free access to more features of this website.

Forgot your username or password?

You are invited to
apply for membership
of Healthy Skepticism,
if you support our aims.

Pay a subscription

Support our work with a donation

Buy Healthy Skepticism T Shirts


If there is something you don't like, please tell us. If you like our work, please tell others.

Email a Friend








Far too large a section of the treatment of disease is to-day controlled by the big manufacturing pharmacists, who have enslaved us in a plausible pseudo-science...
The blind faith which some men have in medicines illustrates too often the greatest of all human capacities - the capacity for self deception...
Some one will say, Is this all your science has to tell us? Is this the outcome of decades of good clinical work, of patient study of the disease, of anxious trial in such good faith of so many drugs? Give us back the childlike trust of the fathers in antimony and in the lancet rather than this cold nihilism. Not at all! Let us accept the truth, however unpleasant it may be, and with the death rate staring us in the face, let us not be deceived with vain fancies...
we need a stern, iconoclastic spirit which leads, not to nihilism, but to an active skepticism - not the passive skepticism, born of despair, but the active skepticism born of a knowledge that recognizes its limitations and knows full well that only in this attitude of mind can true progress be made.
- William Osler 1909