Healthy Skepticism Library item: 5009

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

Krasner J.
Senate OK's licensing of drug reps
boston.com business 2006 Jun 1
http://www.boston.com/business/globe/articles/2006/06/01/senate_oks_licensing_of_drug_reps/

Notes:

Ralph Faggotter’s Comments:

“In a statement, PhRMA senior vice president Ken Johnson said Montigny’s proposal “would impose an additional burden on the sharing of new information with physicians.” “

This depends on how you define ‘information’!

If this amendment were to be passed it would create a wonderful precedent for other jurisdictions to follow- and could stick a fatal stake into the dark heart of drug repping.

Full text:

Senate OK’s licensing of drug reps
State could be 1st to regulate sales policies

By Jeffrey Krasner, Globe Staff | June 1, 2006

A proposal passed by the state Senate could make Massachusetts the first state in the nation to license drug company sales representatives and would prohibit them from providing entertainment, gifts, payments, or travel to doctors, healthcare facilities, or public officials.

The proposal by Senator Mark Montigny, Democrat of New Bedford, was passed as an amendment to the state budget. For it to become law, the House of Representatives must agree to the provisions when after a House-Senate conference committee offers a compromise budget plan.

Montigny said drug company representatives are subject to less scrutiny than many other professionals who have less potential impact on people’s health.

``Hairdressers and manicurists must be licensed to work in the Commonwealth,” he said. ``Pharmaceutical representatives who market prescription drugs and attempt to influence doctors to prescribe name-brand drugs should also be licensed.”

The ban on entertainment, gifts, payments, and travel could disrupt the activities of sales representatives, who often favor discussing their companies’ products in social settings.

Drug makers also frequently give doctors payments for attending ``educational” events, and offer them and their staff members pens, paper pads, refrigerator magnets, and other trinkets.

A spokeswoman for the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, or PhRMA, a trade group for large drug companies, said she is unaware of any other states that license drug sales representatives.

In a statement, PhRMA senior vice president Ken Johnson said Montigny’s proposal ``would impose an additional burden on the sharing of new information with physicians.”

``The amendment also seeks to impose criminal penalties on what should be viewed as the important sharing of information between pharmaceutical companies and physicians regarding the risks and benefits of medicine,” he said.

But Dr. Joseph Gerstein , a whistle-blower in the federal government’s case against TAP Pharmaceutical Products for improper marketing practices, said the sales representatives are not engaged in educational efforts.

``If pharmaceutical companies were really interested in education, as opposed to sales, then pharmaceutical salespeople would be rewarded according to how accurately and effectively they conveyed the crucial information about indications, side effects, and toxicity to physicians,” Gerstein said. ``They are not. They are rewarded on how much they increase sales. That says it all.”

A government investigation based in part on Gerstein’s allegations led Abbott Laboratories and Takeda Chemical Industries to pay $875 million to settle civil and criminal charges.

Still, some think the measures Montigny seeks are extreme.

``This doesn’t distinguish between what we think are reasonable and beneficial gifts and inducements that are appropriate for the drug companies to hand out, particularly if it will benefit the patient,” said Dr. Kenneth Peelle, a radiologist and president of the Massachusetts Medical Society, a professional group for doctors. ``At educational seminars, they’re obviously pushing their own drug, but they’re also giving useful information.”

Drug companies often host dinners with doctors at venues such as Fugakyu Japanese Cuisine in Brookline and the Four Seasons Hotel in Boston.

Peelle said such events would be acceptable if drug companies provided a ``modest meal,” such as sandwiches, in a hospital conference room.

Dr. Marcia Angell , former editor of the New England Journal of Medicine and a vocal critic of drug industry marketing practices, said she doubted whether licensing sales representatives was appropriate.

``Licensing somehow suggests that these people are legitimate educators of doctors,” she said. ``I suppose it’s better than nothing.”

Angell also blamed her own profession for some of the problems related to improper drug marketing. ``There are bribers and bribees. We need doctors to stop taking bribes,” she said.

The Senate measure would require pharmaceutical representatives to complete training before receiving their licenses and to participate in continuing education. Thomas Finneran , chief executive of the Massachusetts Biotechnology Council, said that measure would stifle the biotech industry.

``This is an attempt to smother the industry with another layer of bureaucracy and regulation,” said Finneran. ``It’s an oblique attack dressed up in public-interest clothing.”

If the measure becomes law, licensing fees would be split between the attorney general’s office, where they would be used to prosecute Medicaid fraud, and the Board of Registration in Pharmacy, where the money would be used to reduce medical errors.

Montigny said he has separately introduced the proposal as a bill in the Senate, should the measure fail during the budget talks.

``I’m not going away on this issue,” he said. ``We need to ban all manipulation of drug-prescribing practices.”

Jeffrey Krasner can be reached at krasner@globe.com.
© Copyright 2006 Globe Newspaper Company.