Submission

PharmaGossip’s submission to the RCP’s Physicians and the Pharmaceutical Industry working party Link

Mr Chairman, Ladies and Gentlemen,

Thank you for receiving this submission. For personal reasons I must keep my identity secret.

I will attempt to reference my observations wherever possible.

I note the objectives and tasks of the working party and the questions you pose regarding the nature of the ideal relationship between the pharmaceutical industry, the NHS, and academic medicine.


First let’s take a look at current situation.

1. A recent US paper http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/299/6/665
caused me to consider if we in the UK have a clear understanding of the potential conflicts of interest pervading our medical schools and academic institutions.

I would suggest not.

It might be useful for the RCP to lead on such a project.

2. The case of Dr Aubrey Blumsohn, Sheffield University and Procter & Gamble http://www.slate.com/id/2133061 would be a useful example to consider.

I would propose that academics undertaking research on behalf of the drug industry should be allowed, at the very least, to see and comment on the data!

Again, something the RCP could recommend.

I would also suggest that Dr Blumsohn be invited to present to the working party.

3. Now I turn to the distasteful matter of “academic abuse”.

Here I quote two examples: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4696609 .
That of Dr. Gurkirpal Singh of Stanford University, whom Merck tried to warn off from making critical statements about Vioxx's heart risks.

Secondly, the intimidation of Dr John Buse, by GlaxoSmithKline. http://finance.senate.gov/press/Bpress/2007press/prb111507a.pdf

It doesn’t look good when companies try to intimidate academics to keep quiet about potential drug risks.

But what about the academics, who think that they can “ride the tiger” and still stay in control?

Dr. Buse, it appears, thought that on the one hand he could pocket his consulting fees from GSK and on the other hand could freely speak his mind as an academic scientist.

Is that naive?

When we physicians are lacking in our own professional integrity, pointing fingers at the bad drug companies is hardly an adequate ethical response!

4. Now, turning to the pharmaceutical industry.

The PharmaGossip web log http://pharmagossip.blogspot.com/ was started a few years ago to help the industry take a long cold hard look at itself.

It has just passed the half million hits mark and around 50-60% of its readers have drug industry IP addresses.

I note that the working party has quite a few representatives from Big Pharma; ex-Astellas, Pfizer, GSK.

I would refer the working party to the following:

http://pharmagossip.blogspot.com/2005/10/evergreen.html

http://pharmagossip.blogspot.com/2007/05/pfizer-trovan-out-of-africa-2-billion.html

http://pharmagossip.blogspot.com/2007/07/gsk-avandia-conflicts-of-interest.html

http://pharmagossip.blogspot.com/2008/01/gsk-avandia-dr-haffner-is-busted.html

Recommendation

I remain somewhat sceptical of the working party and its ability to change things for the better.

However I would suggest that you focus on shedding as much light at possible on the financial relationships the industry has with academics and their institutions.

Sunlight is a great disinfectant!

“Jack Friday”