[Ip-health] John Mack: Pharma Tail Wags Patient Dogs

[James Love]

* Although patients seldom know it, many patient groups and drug
companies maintain close, multimillion-dollar relationships while
disclosing limited or no details about the ties. (See "Donations tie
drug firms and nonprofits", http://www.philly.com/mld/philly/living/
health/14687073.htm.)

*The American Diabetes Association, a leading patient health group,
privately enlisted an Eli Lilly & Co. executive to chart its growth
strategy and write its slogan.

* The National Alliance on Mental Illness, an outspoken patient
advocate, lobbies for treatment programs that also benefit its drug-
company donors.

* The National Gaucher Foundation, a supporter of people suffering
from a horrific rare disease, gets nearly all its revenue from one
drugmaker, Genzyme Corp.

* In some cases, pharmaceutical companies have been known to
establish patient non-profit organizations out of thin air.


http://pharmamkting.blogspot.com/2006/06/pharma-tail-wags-patient-
dogs.html

Thursday, June 01, 2006
Pharma Tail Wags Patient Dogs
John Mack

There's no doubt that pharmaceutical marketers have deep penetration
into patient advocacy groups. As reported recently in the
Philadelphia Inquirer:

Although patients seldom know it, many patient groups and drug
companies maintain close, multimillion-dollar relationships while
disclosing limited or no details about the ties. (See "Donations tie
drug firms and nonprofits".)

It's one thing for patient organizations to accept this pharma
largesse, but it's another to hide it from view and to be totally
beholding to a single sponsor. Here are some examples pointed out in
the article:

*The American Diabetes Association, a leading patient health group,
privately enlisted an Eli Lilly & Co. executive to chart its growth
strategy and write its slogan.

* The National Alliance on Mental Illness, an outspoken patient
advocate, lobbies for treatment programs that also benefit its drug-
company donors.

* The National Gaucher Foundation, a supporter of people suffering
from a horrific rare disease, gets nearly all its revenue from one
drugmaker, Genzyme Corp.

In some cases, pharmaceutical companies have been known to establish
patient non-profit organizations out of thin air. In these situations
one wonders who is the dog and who is the tail?

Pharmaceutical companies have two customers: doctors and patients. As
marketers and sales reps get pushed back by one customer, they
inevitably push the envelope to target the other.

Sometimes, patients are confused with "consumers" as in the notion
entertained by some ad agencies that all consumers are patients. Many
consumers eventually do become patients and that is the goal of
direct-to-consumer (DTC) advertising. The problem is, after they
become patients half of them drop out of treatment. Patients may also
switch to a competitor product or -- horror of horrors -- opt for the
generic version if one exists.

Another difference between consumers and patients is that patients
can be organized and influenced. Thus, pharma companies often
organize patient groups and influence them to lobby on their behalf
or promote statistics than inflate how many sufferers are out there
(see "Disease Awareness or Disease Mongering?").

Contrary to popular myths, marketers inside pharmaceutical companies
are not as creative as their brethren in outside agencies of record
that constantly urge their clients to descend to new depths of
questionable marketing practices. An example would be buzz and blog
marketing (see "Buzz 'n Blogs -- Stealth Marketing"http://
pharmamkting.blogspot.com/2006/03/buzz-n-blogs-stealth-marketing.html).

Eventually, the agency wins out over the caution of internal
marketers whose careers are at stake. That is, the pharma marketing
people buy the pitch and take the plunge.

With regard to patient advocacy groups, here's an idea that was
recently published in Medical Marketing & Media, an industry trade
publication: drug marketers should infiltrate patient support groups.

MRxHealth's Jo Anne Jensen suggests taking a leaf out of the medical
education playbook, namely peer group dinner meetings. "Pharma
companies guide the meetings [tail wagging the dog], but they don't
lead them," she notes. ... "The same format would be extremely
successful among patients." Food for thought. [MM&M, June 2006 issue]

Food for thought indeed! I would call it "wooly-headed thinking" (for
more on my thoughts on wooly-headedness, see "Clash!").

Ms. Jensen seems to be unaware that physician peer group dinner
meetings have come under scrutiny lately as thinly disguised junkets
for docs. New rules and regulations have scaled back the practice and
made the dinner much less appetizing. Here's a case where the
industry has been pushed back on one customer front (docs) and is now
being urged to divert its funds to another customer (patients).

Unfortunately, there are no guidelines, regulations, or anti-kickback
laws governing pharmaceutical interaction with patients. How's that
for "food for thought"?

Link to this Post posted by John Mack @ 8:33 AM
Comments: Post a Comment


---------------------------------
James Love, CPTech / www.cptech.org / mailto:james.love@cptech.org /
tel. +1.202.332.2670 / mobile +1.202.361.3040

"If everyone thinks the same: No one thinks."  Bill Walton