Thursday, June 29, 2006

Merck - Vioxx: complicity theory

In the past, when things have gone badly wrong, Insider has subscribed to the idea that it's either due to a "cock-up" or a "conspiracy".

Now Paul Dieppe, from Bristol University has another possibility "complicity theory".

He relates this theory to the Vioxx/coxibs issue:

"Complicity works like this.

All those with a vested interest in an enterprise get sucked into the rhetoric associated with it, and they soon `believe' in everything that is going on within that enterprise. If personal financial gain is involved, corruption may also occur. So, in the case of drugs such as anti-inflammatory agents, researchers and prescribers work with the industry to promote the development, testing and use of these drugs.

Personal financial gains come through company shares, consultancies and free trips to exotic locations (for those who do research or actively promote the drugs), trips to educational meetings (for specialists), or `just' free lunches (for just about everybody—does any doctor still buy his/her own lunch?).11

If this goes on for long enough (and it has), everyone starts to believe that they are doing the right thing when they accept company largesse, and to believe in the drugs. And they do not realize that their ability to look at data critically, and at drug use objectively, has been compromised. So, when data comes along that says that rofecoxib causes heart attacks, lots of people say `wait a minute, rofecoxib is wonderful, so maybe the explanation for this is that the NSAID comparator (naproxen) is also a wonder drug and is protecting people against heart attacks'.12

The marketing pressures make all of this worse, of course. So when a paper gets published that says that celecoxib is wonderful, it gets distributed to everyone (as they attend the free lunch event). And when it turns out that the data are flawed (fraud?) the papers still go on being distributed to everyone.13

The pharmaceutical industry has developed a position of extraordinary power over governments, medical research and medical practice.14,15

But complicity theory makes it clear that this would not have been possible without others going along with their story. Doctors have been terrible in that regard; we now work in an industry where companies who stand to profit from our activities sponsor most of our postgraduate education.

Politicians are also to blame. For example, Gordon Brown is campaigning to keep the pharmaceutical industry in Britain, to help `UK plc', and one result of that is that all of us (including Medical Research Council scientists like myself), are being encouraged to work with the industry.

The complicity of politicians and health professionals with the pharmaceutical industry agenda, driven by the profit motive, has made us all blind to data and to common sense. For example, there is now widespread use of drugs (including NSAIDs and coxibs) for problems that are largely social, behavioural or mechanical in origin and the prevention and treatment of which is more logically approached through behavioural interventions than by the use of drugs.16

Most current medical research, as well as medical practice, is dominated by the vested interests of the multi-national pharmaceutical industry, which is now busy inventing diseases for which it can find drugs.17

We now live in a medical culture that appears to have become completely drug dependent—because of money.

How bad is that? "

Insider's view: this all rings so true.

Complicity theory explains the venality of medicine today.

This is both a seminal idea and thought provoking piece.


Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine

No comments: