Healthy Skepticism Library item: 15531

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

Barlow D.
AG: Loophole restricts Rx data sharing
Times Argus.com 2009 Apr 29
http://www.timesargus.com/article/20090425/NEWS02/904250317/1003/NEWS02

Full text:

Vermont Attorney General William Sorrell told lawmakers Thursday that a loophole in the state’s pharmaceutical marketing bill restricts him from releasing useful information on the relationships between doctors and the industry.

Sorrell, whose office released an annual report detailing the cash gifts and donations made to Vermont medical officials and the pharmaceutical industry, urged lawmakers to remove a “trade secrets” exemption in the current law.

“We have answers that we would like to give the committee,” Sorrell told members of the House Health Care Committee. “But current law does not allow us to disclose that information.”

That information, Sorrell said, includes the names of many members of Vermont’s medical community who receive cash gifts and donations from the industry. He said the trade secret provision in Vermont’s 2002 law has been overused by the industry since it was added at their request.

Vermont has one of the strongest pharmaceutical marketing laws in the country, but advocates for more transparency in this murky financial relationship between the companies that make prescription drugs and those who prescribe them say it hasn’t gone far enough.

Sorrell said that from the documents he has seen the marketing budgets for the pharmaceutical companies “dwarf” their research and development budgets.

“The law is really on the companies’ side right now,” Sorrell said.

The bill, which was passed by the Vermont Senate earlier this session and has less than two weeks to work its way through the House before this year’s legislative session concludes, would outright ban most gifts between doctors and the industry.

It would also remove the trade secret provision from current law – which Sorrell said shields about 80 percent of the information on these relationships – and set up an on-line database to allow patients to search for their doctor’s name and see exactly how much, if any, money they get from the industry.

Pharmaceutical companies are strongly opposed to most of the provisions in the bill. Representatives for these companies have told lawmakers that they are already making internal policy changes regarding interactions between their employees and doctors.

Marjorie Powell, the senior assistant general council for the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, told lawmakers Friday that their drug representatives are well trained in what they can and can’t do in their meetings with drug prescribers.

She worried that any ban of giving free food and meals to doctors would result in the state seeing fewer contracts for clinical trials of new drugs. She said it would be an administrative nightmare for companies that contract with doctors to test new medicines.

“It makes no sense that I couldn’t provide a meal to a physician who is conducting my clinical trial,” Powell said.

Gov. James Douglas expressed support for the bill during his weekly Statehouse press conference this week – as long as the bill doesn’t interfere with Vermont’s growing biotechnology sector.

“As a general rule, the more disclosure the better,” Douglas said.

One of the more controversial provisions in the bill is a ban of gifts of food to doctors and medical professionals. The industry says that they use doctor’s lunchtimes as opportunities to fit into their busy schedules.

Sorrell did not take a position on that provision, but said if lawmakers want to restrict gifts of food they should put an annual financial cap on it. He also said that any attempt to ban the supplying of studies, books or other written materials between the two parties could face a court challenge.

“I would go slowly if you want to do an outright ban,” he said.

Ken Libertoff, the executive director of the Vermont Association for Mental Health, told lawmakers that there is “no such thing as a free meal.” He said 11 percent of Vermont doctors received more than $1,000 in free meals last year from the industry.

“The notion that doctors are so busy that the only way they can gain access to important pharmaceutical information is by having food delivered so that they can be feed and educated is either a relic of a past era of believing that there is such thing as a free lunch or simply an absurd proposition,” he told lawmakers.