Pharmas Try to Do Something RIght

…after trying to rip us off first…In the NY Times Business Day section there was an interesting article.”Heart Pill To Be Sold By Itself”Here is the story in a nutshell:One of the big pharmas developed a new drug called torcetrapibThis drug increases good cholesterol (HDL)The current heart drugs called statins (Lipitor, Zocor, Crestor) only lower bad cholesterol (LDL) Experts say this new drug that raises good cholesterol could be a great advanceTorcetrapib is introduced to the public with the requirement that it must be prescribed in tandem with a statin drug made by the same company.In my opinion, this is a terrible ethical error. It is bad to attach an important drug to a different class of drugs for a few reasons: a) not all patients need the drug you are attaching it to, b) some patients may have serious side effects to the drug you are attaching it to c) some patients may have had better responses to competitors’ products than the drug you are attaching it to.The outcome:Said pharmaceutical company gets its proverbial butt whooped in the medical and legal communityQuestions about antitrust issues ariseCardiologists complainedThe prestigious New England Journal of Medicine criticized their strategy in a long and prominent article.Pharma bows to the criticism and changes its strategy.The article starts with an interview of their top scientist, who defended the combo strategy (pre-criticism). He spouts off an excuse about needing to check the new drug with every statin-type drug to make it safe. Boy is that stupid. Why doesn’t he say you need to test it with every freakin’ happy meal from McDonald’s? It’s about the same — might as well expose yourself immediately.The article then quotes their President of Worldwide Development who confirms they have changed their strategy (post-criticism). Is this because their top scientist is a yo-yo head? No. This genius is quoted as saying “We didn’t appreciate how this would be perceived.” What the heck does that mean?I will tell you what it means. It means that they tried to fool the American medical community but they did not think they would get caught. They did not “appreciate” how their irresponsible behavior would be “perceived.” Did they expect a medal for trying to pull the wool over our eyes? I’ll bake them a cake this week.Two doctors quoted in the article seem commend the company for their strategy change action. The heck with that. You don’t get credit when you do the obvious correct thing. You are just supposed to do it. One doctor, who is doing a clinical study for them “lauded” them for its decision and said “[This company] is ALLOWING physicians to make intelligent choices for patients.” Well excuuuuuuuse me. I thought doctors made intelligent choices for their patients for high level reasons and not because pharmaceutical companies ALLOWED them to.I am sure we have our ethical priorities on ass-backward if we think pharmas ALLOW physicians to do anything. Physicians write for their drugs. Last year this particular pharma had sales of $51 billion dollars. I guess that using the same logic, they ALLOWED physicians to make them a gazillion dollars.Listen, here is the bottom line. They are making a drug that may work. It may be the best thing since the invention of the PEZ dispenser. They tried to squeeze out more profits at the expense of patient health.They got caught. Let me repeat that for the ethically challenged — THEY GOT CAUGHT. They were forced to change. They changed. You don’t get lauded for that. You should be smart enough to know right from wrong in the first place. Next time get your act together Pfizer and do the right thing from the start.Parenthetically, I am personally on their statin drug. Next presciption I am changing to another statin. Now that I am ALLOWED to make intelligent choices this will be my first one.Dr. K.Related Topics: Panel: FDA Needs Drug Safety Reforms, Brand Rx Prices Rise Another 6.3%Technorati Tags: torcetrapib, cholesterol, prescription drugs

More about Zocor