Filed under: pharmaceutical marketing, physician | Tags: advertising, Big Pharma, healthcare, marketing, patient education, pharmaceutical rep, physicians
According to Dr. Candida Fink’s latest blog post on PsychCentral, not highly. In what clearly wasn’t a good year for pharma in terms of reputation, Dr. Fink highlights why she will “no longer see any drug reps.”
I didn’t want to hear from them, and I haven’t since. I avoid lectures and meetings that drug companies sponsor, and I use no drug company pens or notepads. The longer I avoid direct contact with drug company reps, the better I feel about it. The further removed I am from these things the more I realize I was getting a lot of my information about medications from company reps who had vested interests in my using their product. I realized that I don’t need samples, because the companies give samples only of their newest products, and those don’t have the research or track records that the older products have. Furthermore, the older products are now available as generics, which ultimately save my patients far more money than they save by taking a few free samples and then paying for the priciest, newest product.
Obviously, this is the opinion of one physician, but the points Dr. Fink brings up about her disdain for pharmaceutical marketing tactics have been echoed more than once lately. So if not from pharma companies, where would physicians get their information about products? According to Dr. Fink,”That isn’t to say I don’t keep informed and try new products that are appropriate for certain patients, but I do so based on research and my patients’ needs, not who bought me lunch last week.”
Samples, proper medical education, and other informative materials should be needed to help improve patient outcomes. But physicians seem to be turning their heads the other way. If pharma doesn’t heal the wounds and restore the trust with physicians, credibility will be the least of its problems. What do you think?
Read Dr. Fink’s post here.
Filed under: pharmaceutical marketing, Uncategorized | Tags: Big Pharma, bmj, brands, cochrane, pharma, pharmaceutical, tamiflu, transparency, trust
The internet was blazing hot yesterday and today about the latest, in now an ever-growing list of transparency issues with Big Pharma and blockbuster drugs. The latest victim – Roche’s Tamiflu. According to a recent analysis published by the British Medical Journal, it was concluded that Tamiflu had “modest effectiveness” against the symptoms of the flu in otherwise healthy adults — cutting symptoms by about a day.
The report, an update of a 2005 analysis by Cochrane Collaboration, excluded eight studies funded by Roche that haven’t been published and whose full data wasn’t given to the researchers. The exclusion reversed the group’s earlier finding that Tamiflu protects against complications.
The report raises questions about how drugs are reviewed, approved and distributed, Fiona Godlee, the British journal’s editor in chief, wrote in an editorial. The studies originally used to establish the benefits of Tamiflu were written by Roche employees and paid consultants, under-reported serious side effects and failed to clearly identify all the authors, she wrote. In at least one case, a study was attributed to a researcher who disavowed any involvement to the journal, Godlee wrote.
Follow the story here:
Filed under: pharmaceutical marketing, physician | Tags: advertising, agency, Big Pharma, brand manager, brands, education, pharmaceutical rep, physicians, relationships, transparency, trust
The “conspirators” have been revealed—the Pharmageddon2012 “conspirators” that is. This past week, the November issue of MedAd News broke a story on Pharmageddon2012 and the people behind the scene—S+R Medical Communications (SRMC) and Friday Morning.
For those of you who have not taken the time to check out Pharmageddon2012, this multifaceted website uses a variety of social media outlets to carefully and anonymously describe what we believe is the pharma industry’s greatest problem—the breakdown of communication and trust between physicians and the industry.
The site, describes the issues and problems that exist but what it doesn’t address is the passion, belief, and attitude of those people at SRMC and Friday Morning who have to live and deal with the implications of what Pharmageddon2012 represents. You must admit a campaign like Pharmageddon2012 could be risky for a business that that has spent over 18 years enabling and helping our pharma clients devise the very same communication pieces and strategies that we believe contributed to the demise of physician trust.
However, we also believe that someone needs to lead the charge for change and why shouldn’t it be SRMC and Friday Morning? We spent the last 10 years closely watching, listening, and seeing firsthand the strategies and tactics that led to the mistrust problems. We were frustrated and angry about the situation, and we struggled to understand what new strategies and solutions we might incorporate into our business model. The end objective is to help us build our success—and, equally as important, that of our clients.
To that end, we must help clients find ways to restore physician confidence AND improve patient outcomes.
So while we are willing put our collective necks on the line, the real question is which pharma companies will be the first to understand and see the need for communicating with physicians in a different way? Which companies will choose to use educational programming that is needs-based? Are you, as a pharma marketer, willing to use total transparency and clarity as you describe ALL of the important aspects of how your brand is best used? When a physician asks, “Which of my patients are specifically and best suited for what your product does?” what will your sales force say? How will you provide educational and promotional programs that allow your sales force to bring value and relationship building to every sales call?
Is YOUR pharma company willing be a leader and change the pharma/physician communication model back to a constructive, trusting, value-based relationship? Do you believe that you can participate in this change process and at the same time positively impact your brand’s financial achievements? It’s tough to be a leader and to stand out from the crowd. But in fact, that is the opportunity that is before us right now.
If you have the same passion and spirit for this issue as we do, if your brain and heart tell you it is time to do it differently, please contact me. I can show you how we can work together to put our industry, your company, and your products back on a more productive, positive path.
CEO, North State Resources, Inc.
Filed under: advertising, pharmaceutical marketing | Tags: Big Pharma, brands, drugs, FDA, healthcare, patient education, physicians, products, relationship, safety, trust
What needs to be done? Start here.
Filed under: interactive, mobile, pharmaceutical marketing | Tags: advertising, android, Big Pharma, iPhone, layar, marketing, mobile, pharmaceutical, physicians, video
Coming to a mobile phone (Android and iPhone) near you, in the not so distant future, is the world’s first Augmented Reality Browser – Layar. Layar is a free application for your mobile phone, which shows what is around you by displaying real time digital information on top of reality through the camera of your mobile phone.
Layar is derived from location based services and works on mobile phones that include a camera, GPS and a compass. By looking through the phone’s camera lens, a user can see houses for sale, popular bars and shops, jobs, etc. I can see a world of opportunity for the healthcare industry, especially for providers and physicians. What do you see?
Filed under: pharmaceutical marketing | Tags: advertising, agency, Big Pharma, FDA, marketing, pharmaceutical
In pharmaceutical advertising, we find ourselves in a state of constant regulation as everyone tries to ensure each piece created meets FDA requirements. This struggle between advertising the benefits of a drug and satisfying the necessity to indicate the risks (in increasingly larger quantity and size) is one we face daily. With the recent release of the draft form of Guidance for Industry Presenting Risk Information in Prescription Drug and Medical Device Promotion , a set of non-binding recommendations for print and broadcast promotion, the FDA is attempting to help us along. The stated goal of the draft guidance is to clarify the factors the FDA considers in evaluating ads and promotional labeling for prescription drugs and restricted medical devices.
Overall, the FDA is clarifying the presentation of risk information so that it is equivalent to the presentation of benefit information, which is nothing new. But they are doing this by including more detail and examples. Their examples and occasionally vague language indicate how tricky this situation can be, not only for advertisers but also for the people doing the regulating.
One of the most exciting aspects of the draft guidance is the fact that the FDA will be accepting comments and suggestions for a 90-day period. Though no one can say for sure if the FDA will implement the suggested changes they receive, now is the time to review these draft recommendations and share your thoughts. If you think the examples they provide are not sufficient, you should request more, better examples. If you think their recommendations aren’t practical, you should tell them that and explain why. Maybe they’ll agree. We now have the opportunity to perhaps gain some control over a situation that affects pharmaceutical companies and advertisers daily. We shouldn’t let that opportunity pass without at least trying to make a difference.
Comments and suggestions can be submitted until August 24, 2009. Be sure to include the docket number, FDA-2008-D-0253, from the notice of availability that came out on May 27, 2009.
Send comments to
Division of Dockets and Management (HFA-305)
Food and Drug Administration
5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061
Rockville, MD 20852
Filed under: advertising, brands, pharmaceutical marketing | Tags: app, Big Pharma, doctor, healthcare, iPhone, ipod, J&J, manhattan research, medical app, pharma, pharmaceutical app, physician, smart phone
The iPod app store has topped 1 billion downloads in just nine months. And during the last 12 weeks, the medical category, although small, was the 3rd fastest growing application segment (a 132.9% change). This type of growth is understandable when you look at the latest numbers from Manhattan Research which show that physician use of smart phones has jumped to 64% in 2009.
Apple has even targeted healthcare use with the iPhone through the introduction of its new 3.0 operating system, which allows for easier development of application programing interfaces (API). J&J has already taken advantage of the new OS with their LifeScan application, but where is the rest of Big Pharma? Developers are waiting for your call.
Watch the iPhone 3.0 OS presentation here.
Filed under: pharmaceutical marketing | Tags: art, cartoon, conventions, illustration, Medical, pharma, s&r communication, stet, swag, tchotchke, trade show