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: 18371

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
Johnson & Johnson Discloses Fees Paid To Doctors
Pharmalot 2010 July 9
http://www.pharmalot.com/2010/07/johnson-johnson-discloses-fees-paid-to-doctors/


Full text:

The healthcare giant joins a growing list of drugmakers that are disclosing info about their financial ties to physicians. The move comes after passage of the health care reform bill, which includes a provision known as Physician Payments Sunshine that requires drugmakers each year to record – starting 2012 – all gifts and payments to docs and teaching hospitals. Posting begins in 2013.
The J&J list, however, offers both good news and bad news. The good news? J&J is disclosing payments. The bad news? Since J&J runs what are effectively different operating units, there are separate lists for separate units – which makes it difficult to get the bigger picture. The J&J units that have posted their first quarterly reports are Ortho-McNeil-Janssen, Centocor Ortho Biotech and Tibotec.
Why is there no aggregate disclosure? Because each link represents and individual legal entity, a J&J spokesman tells The Wall Street Journal. Consequently, anyone wishing to compile what J&J has paid docs will have to create their own spreadsheet. And unlike the Pfizer site, for instance, there is no info on money paid for meals, non-educational items or research (back story).
“The other way in which the J&J disclosures are not aggregated is that each payment is reported separately, so a patient would have to manually total each individual payment to know how much a physician had received, even from a single operating unit.” says Allan Coukell, director of the Pew Prescription Project, which worked for Sunshine provision. And “J&J is reporting payments greater than $25, for any individual who receives an aggregate of more than $250. The Sunshine threshold is $10.”
A larger problem? The drugmakers that do post disclosures – GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer, Lilly, Merck and Cephalon – do not all use the same format. This is another impediment to gaining a top-down view, which is why a uniform approach has been pushed (see background here). What do you get from J&J? The reports tally each payment for speaking, consulting and, in a very few cases, post-marketing safety surveillance. Take a look and you’ll see numerous docs received several thousand dollars each during this year’s first quarter.

 

  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