Fascinating, frightening reading

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Thanks to the Carlat blog for pointing this article out. Bottom line--never doubt that the message you get from your friendly drug rep is oriented to save their company's bottom line, not save your patient's life.
A quote from my pharm teacher back in med school: "drug reps are nice people, they bring you meds and free stuff. But if you ever change any patient treatment based on what they tell you, you will rot in hell forever." Very applicable here.
 
I rotated with a very unique PCP who would pimp me and other students in front of drug reps

Dr: How do you know when a drug rep is lying?
Me: Um... Uh... (feeling and looking very uncomfortable)
Dr: When their lips are moving.

I was pimped on this enough times I just started to answer automatically.
 
I rotated with a very unique PCP who would pimp me and other students in front of drug reps

Dr: How do you know when a drug rep is lying?
Me: Um... Uh... (feeling and looking very uncomfortable)
Dr: When their lips are moving.

I was pimped on this enough times I just started to answer automatically.

My standard practice with med students was to let them hear the drug rep, read the pamphlet, ask questions, and then (sometimes with the rep still there) say, "Now this is an excellent opportunity to talk about how to evaluate information you're given, no matter what the source. Let's talk about what (s)he didn't say. Look at the first paragraph of the pamphlet and tell me what questions you'd ask if you suspected the writer was hiding something?" And we'd go through all the handouts; which things are true, which things are half-truths, which are "class effects" and not specifically related to this product at all, and which things are true but are presented in such a way as to imply a conclusion which is false (always the hardest to pick up because the marketing writers are so clever).

I believe there can be a useful relationship with drug reps, but it's tricky.
I was often quite friendly with Drug Reps where I had access to them, and I had no problem asking them for reprints, help arranging to get samples into our pharmacy so we could try a new med (we weren't permitted to have any samples in our offices, and that's fine with me), and use them to get access to the "Clinical Science" staff at the company if I had a question about the basic organic chemistry involved - but they always knew that I wouldn't take a single pen or cookie or a glass of wine. And they knew that I wouldn't believe anything unless it was published in a peer reviewed journal and only after I had read the article. Sometimes I had to contact the authors to get particular questions answered, and they could often facilitate that, too.

I think of Drug Reps in much the same way that I think of something like clozapine; very useful in a certain set of circumstances, but fraught with potential problems which can be fatal, so has to be managed quite carefully and with constant attention. To simply declare that it's never worth the trouble means you are ignoring a tool at your disposal, only because you aren't willing to put in the effort to use it properly and you won't bother to protect yourself from the seduction of attention/praise/flirting/gifts/food/etc.
 
I can't stand interacting with drug reps, it's so awkward. For me it always feels like being visited by a used-cars salesman at the hospital. Very pert and attractive used-cars salesmen.
 
While Carlat raises some important questions, he is sometimes way too biased and has his own conflict of interest. I heard him speak at our grand rounds a couple of years ago and his spiel was somewhat off-putting. He is one of the the players who is into CME business and is thus, in competition with drug industry. Somewhat like global warming debate, we know it exists but both sides do their best to twist the truth which lies somewhere in the middle.
 
While Carlat raises some important questions, he is sometimes way too biased and has his own conflict of interest. I heard him speak at our grand rounds a couple of years ago and his spiel was somewhat off-putting. He is one of the the players who is into CME business and is thus, in competition with drug industry. Somewhat like global warming debate, we know it exists but both sides do their best to twist the truth which lies somewhere in the middle.

Uhh, right. I'm sure that PHARMA is losing sleep over the cut that Carlat is making in the lucrative CME market... 🙄

In any case, Carlat had nothing to do with the bioethics article that I linked in the OP.
 
Top