Posted by stargazer2 on November 26, 2007, at 15:52:30
In reply to NY Times article - 'Dr. Drug Rep', posted by jrbecker76 on November 26, 2007, at 15:03:38
The doctor that wrote the story was wooed by Wyeth to educate Primary care Physicians in the use of Effexor-XR as a better medication for depression than other AD meds. Although it has a slight advantage over other meds, it has a larger risk of hypertension, which the drug company wanted him to downplay, of course.
He began to understand some of the drawbacks of Effexor and he became doubtful of Effexor's actual success over the other AD's after he looked at some of the data which were based on very short term studies which do not have much validity.
He did this for a year making around 30k but became disillusioned by Wyeth and their attempts to minimize the negatives of the drugs. He began to doubt the success of the drug and he didn't want to be associated with giving PCP's a less than total evaluation of the med, which would have included the side effect of hypertension.
He was too ethical to continue to do this even though he admits the money was very enticing.
It was a very interesting story of pharmaceutical companies continued attempts to minimize side effects and educate doctors based primarily on positive results, even when negative effects are known.
Thank God there are some ethical physicians that have stellar reputations they don't want to tarnish by being a pharmaceutical company's spokesperson, while practicing under the medical credo of "doing no harm".
I can't believe pharmas have gone after MD's in this capacity now perhaps since their own reps have no clinical clout when it comes to convincing doctors to use their products, and minimizing any negative effects of a med's side effects.
Sleazy and unethical practices if you ask me.
Stargazer
poster:stargazer2
thread:797163
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20071125/msgs/797168.html