Merck is nice???

[daviddamoore]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Does anyone have any information regarding Merck's donation of Mectizan to Africa in an attempt to eliminate river blindness? Specifically I would like to know what is in it for them... I may have to change my view of them as evil, profit-driven monsters! 😱

 

[Nikki2002]

Merck has been cleared today in the vioxx case

 

[jbrice1639]

Specifically I would like to know what is in it for them... I may have to change my view of them as evil, profit-driven monsters! 😱

THAT's what's in it for them. it's all a pr thing...by doing something "selfless" and "good" they can manipulate their image, and get people to think of them as a caring company instead of a purely profit-driven company. that said, i prefer my pharmaceuticals to come from a profit-driven company that cares about nothing but making the best drugs the fastest so they can make more money.

 

[tigress]

yeah, I was about to say...what's in it for them is that you're even asking this question

of course that doesn't mean that the donations aren't helpful, because of course they are. And who knows, maybe a few people in the company really care and want to help. I'm sure the company as a whole is totally out for profit, but you never know about individuals...

 

[daviddamoore]

Yeah...but like Brice said, people don't really care who they get their drugs from as long as they work, right? Or am I naive because of my background in a country where Pharma doesn't advertise on TV?!

 

[jebus]

They use the same drugs that kill worms in your dogs to kill worms that cause blindness in 35 of the poorest companies in the world. Once a year a system of indigenous volunteers trek the sub-saharan countryside and distribute these pills. Merck doesn't publicize it much; they started the campaign in 1987 and I'm confident you never heard of it before.
I think it's easy to malign these companies, but Merck does this because it is the right thing to do. Stop being so cynical. I mean, they can still be evil, but they aren't being evil here. That they don't publicize this initiative underscores that they aren't doing it for PR.
PBS has a fantastic series covering this and other global health problems at http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/rxforsurvival - from the 2 billion people in the world who are carriers of TB, to reproductive rights in India, to Mectizan in Africa, there are real problems in the world which deserve our attention and not just cynical, knee-jerk reactions against companies like Merck. If nothing else, watching it will make you realize just how good people in the US have things...

 

[xraygray]

i watched last nights episode (mainly because the PI I'm working for was interviewed for the episode on vector transmitted diseases but I didn't see him so I guess he didnt make the cut) anyways...it is a really fascinating series, for the most part, especially if you know little about global health. comes on again tonight at 8:00 (central time). check it out if you get a chance.

 

[cfdavid]

Does anyone have any information regarding Merck's donation of Mectizan to Africa in an attempt to eliminate river blindness? Specifically I would like to know what is in it for them... I may have to change my view of them as evil, profit-driven monsters! 😱

Not sure if you really view these companies as evil. But try to remember the legal responsibility of publicly traded companies. The number one legal priority for them is to make money. You may not like it, but that's just the way it is.

Also, this system works very well, in fact. Without the "greed" of investors willing to risk their money to subsidize the costs of developing new technologies/innovations perhaps there would be no Mectizan to begin with.

Sure, the government does SOME things better than the private sector. But, it doesn't "innovate" like the private sector. And the motive is always greed. So, in a sense, "greed IS good" (quoting Wall Street).

What would you expect? How should these problems be solved? Do you have a better plan?

OK, I'll get off the soap box. I'm not even sure if you were serious about your statement, which I admit seemed light enough. But, there ARE many people who are very serious about such statements. And it's hard for me to see that as anything but naive.

 

[medgator]

I think Wyeth had a similar campaign after the whole prepro/premarin debacle with the WHO studies a few years ago.... Drug companies certainly want to emphasize the good they do when coming under fire for the bad (which in Merck's case has yet to be confirmed).

 

[angietron3000]

seriously. i think pre-meds should be required to take a public relations class in addition to bio and everything else. that way we'd all understand that big donations and little trinkets from pharmaceutical companies are not just about generosity 😉

 

[MINDOFMYOWN]

Test

 

[Indryd]

seriously. i think pre-meds should be required to take a public relations class in addition to bio and everything else. that way we'd all understand that big donations and little trinkets from pharmaceutical companies are not just about generosity 😉

Little trinkets...I'll write more on this, but I am cramped for time right now.

I run two free clinics in two different towns, and between the clinics, which cover a population of about 50,000, we have close to 1,000 patients who receive free brand-name, cutting-edge medications for chronic conditions ranging from hyperlipidemia to schizophrenia directly by mail from all of the major drug companies, including Merck. These companies asked only that a doctor verify the need, and that our staff do some basic work to verify financial/insurance situations of patients, and they send, for free, drugs that sometimes cost 1500 dollars/month...FOR FREE.

When was the last time you saw a magazine article or news report about this (you know, a PR blitz). In fact, I rarely run into anyone who isn't shocked to hear this. Yet, every organization serving underserved populations, especially free clinics like mine, know about it and take advantage of it for their patients.

How is that just a PR move?

Yeah, these companies make a LOT of money, and yes, profits are their number 1 priority, but still...I think at the core there is at least SOME public interest/cooperation operating in all of these companies. Same as doctors who make TONS of money, sure, they want to make money, but there are plenty of ways to do this...

Ok, gotta go...

 

[angietron3000]

I agree. I never said they were entirely evil or that everything they do is PR motivated but I can't help but wonder if the huge, highly publicized donations in the midst of a scandal that could put them out of business aren't entirely altruistic..

Little trinkets...I'll write more on this, but I am cramped for time right now.

I run two free clinics in two different towns, and between the clinics, which cover a population of about 50,000, we have close to 1,000 patients who receive free brand-name, cutting-edge medications for chronic conditions ranging from hyperlipidemia to schizophrenia directly by mail from all of the major drug companies, including Merck. These companies asked only that a doctor verify the need, and that our staff do some basic work to verify financial/insurance situations of patients, and they send, for free, drugs that sometimes cost 1500 dollars/month...FOR FREE.

When was the last time you saw a magazine article or news report about this (you know, a PR blitz). In fact, I rarely run into anyone who isn't shocked to hear this. Yet, every organization serving underserved populations, especially free clinics like mine, know about it and take advantage of it for their patients.

How is that just a PR move?

Yeah, these companies make a LOT of money, and yes, profits are their number 1 priority, but still...I think at the core there is at least SOME public interest/cooperation operating in all of these companies. Same as doctors who make TONS of money, sure, they want to make money, but there are plenty of ways to do this...

Ok, gotta go...

 

[jebus]

I agree. I never said they were entirely evil or that everything they do is PR motivated but I can't help but wonder if the huge, highly publicized donations in the midst of a scandal that could put them out of business aren't entirely altruistic..

Free Mectizan is neither huge nor well publicized. Again, they started this program in 1987 - after they saw that the once-a-year anti-parasite treatments introduced for dogs were successful and well before they started marketing COX-2 inhibitors. Someone knew that river blindness was caused by similar parasites and they adapted the treatment to use in Africa.
That you see a connection between mectizan and vioxx is inappropriate and unnecessarily cynical.
You can see it all here: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/rxforsurvival/series/video/w_sec4_atl_riverblind1.html (it's only 10 minutes long and you really owe it to yourself to see it).
I'll get off my soapbox now.

 

[angietron3000]

I think I just got served 😉

I can't help being cynical, I worked in marketing and advertising for years before my current job in pharmaceutical research. thanks for the info tho.

Free Mectizan is neither huge nor well publicized. Again, they started this program in 1987 - after they saw that the once-a-year anti-parasite treatments introduced for dogs were successful and well before they started marketing COX-2 inhibitors. Someone knew that river blindness was caused by similar parasites and they adapted the treatment to use in Africa.
That you see a connection between mectizan and vioxx is inappropriate and unnecessarily cynical.
You can see it all here: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/rxforsurvival/series/video/w_sec4_atl_riverblind1.html (it's only 10 minutes long and you really owe it to yourself to see it).
I'll get off my soapbox now.

 

[Indryd]

I agree. I never said they were entirely evil or that everything they do is PR motivated but I can't help but wonder if the huge, highly publicized donations in the midst of a scandal that could put them out of business aren't entirely altruistic..

Mkay, mkay...

 

[AznDoc]

you have to take into account that sometimes because of the corruption in some of these third-world countries, the people never actually get the drugs. for example, pfizer donated millions of dollars worth of zithromax to some country in africa, and at this moment they are sitting in boxes in a warehouse while some corrupt gov't official sells them off.

 

[daviddamoore]

I just want to thank all of you for your insight - before deciding on med school I had been considering going into Pharma. I am still sure that MD is the way to go, but that PBS show really restored my faith in our species! This faith had taken quite a battering under the current government (another thread entirely!). A little question along the same lines is whether the "biggest problem in US healthcare" (common interview question) is actually irrelevant in today's globalized world, and that we should be putting as much emphasis on supporting healthcare in the rest of the world as in the US?