Archive for February, 2011
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-12539197 22 February 2011
The NHS in England has launched legal action against Reckitt Benckiser, maker of heartburn medicine Gaviscon.
According to High Court documents, Health Secretary Andrew Lansley is leading the action on behalf of health authorities and primary care trusts.
The Department of Health refused to comment on the subject of the suit.
Reckitt Benckiser was fined £10m last year for abusing its dominant market position in the supply of heartburn remedies to the NHS.
A spokesman for Reckitt said the company could not comment as it had not been served with any papers.
Papers lodged at the High Court show Reckitt is being sued collectively by all 10 Strategic Health Authorities and 144 Primary Care Trusts in England, as well as Andrew Lansley as Secretary of State for Health.
The Office of Fair Trading (OFT) said in October last year that Reckitt had restricted competition in the supply of heartburn medicines.
The household products maker withdrew the original Gavison from the NHS in 2005 and patients were transferred to Gaviscon Advance Liquid.
This happened after Gaviscon’s patent had expired, but before a generic name had been assigned to it, the OFT said.
That meant that prescriptions were issued for Gaviscon Advance, rather than pharmacists being able to choose a cheaper generic alternative.
The OFT’s inquiry followed an investigation by the BBC’s Newsnight programme in 2008.
Gaviscon is one of the most heavily prescribed medicines within the NHS. Confidential papers leaked to the programme by a whistleblower showed it was also very profitable, with a gross margin of 77% in 2003.
The then-chief executive of the OFT, John Fingleton, said at the time: “This case underlines our determination to prevent companies with a dominant position in a market from using their strength to seek to restrict competition from rivals”.
In response to the OFT’s fine, Reckitt said that it had believed it was acting within the law at the time and respected the watchdog’s findings.
I object to violence because when it appears to do good, the good is only temporary; the evil it does is permanent.
Mohanda K. Ghandi
Come to me all who are burdened and I will give you rest….
Matthew 11:28 NRSV Version Bible
http://icarusfilms.com/new2005/sell2.html Selling Sickness
Newsweek Interview with Ray Moynihan
A new book looks at how pharmaceutical companies are using aggressive marketing campaigns to turn more people into patients.
By Jennifer Barrett
Aug. 2, 2005 – There are few Americans these days who aren’t popping pills to treat a complaint, or to prevent one. From headache medicine to cholesterol-lowering drugs to sexual-dysfunction aids, there seems to be a remedy for every disorder out there and even some we didn’t realize existed (until we saw the ad, that is). In their new book, Selling Sickness: How the Worlds Biggest Pharmaceutical Companies Are Turning Us All Into Patients (Nation Books), Ray Moynihan and Alan Cassels examine how the drug industry has transformed the way we think about physical and mental health and turned more and more of us each year into customers. NEWSWEEKs Jennifer Barrett spoke with Moynihan, a medical writer for the Milbank Memorial Fund in New York and a regular contributor to the British Medical Journal, about how and why drug makers have begun targeting people who aren’t sick. Excerpts:
NEWSWEEK: You write that drug makers now aggressively target the healthy. Why?
Ray Moynihan: The book opens with a quote from a former Merck CEO that it was a shame he wasn’t able to make Merck more like the chewing-gum maker, Wrigleys, because then he’d be able to “sell to everyone.” I think that does drive the marketing machinery of the drug companies now. Drug companies target lots of sick people and make fabulous drugs that extend lives and ameliorate suffering. But the so-called preventives are where the big money are: like the bone-density drugs or the cholesterol [-lowering] drugs. Increasingly were seeing the marketing shift to those types of drugs. People talk about the “worried well.” There are many ways in which the drug companies target those people.
You mean people who are well but worried about being sick? How are they targeted?
The use of celebrities is now a standard way in which drug companies don’t just promote their drugs but try and change public awareness, public thinking and public perceptions about illness. In some cases the disease phrasing is legitimate and welcome. But when you have celebrities trying to change the way we think about sexual difficulties or stomach problems or symptoms of stages of life, these are insidious campaigns.
Why celebrities? I might take Serena Williams’ advice on a brand of tennis racket but menstrual migraine medication?
[Laughs.] There’s actually a whole mini industry of celebrity brokers who bring together celebrities and drug companies. I’ve interviewed one of the brokers who talked about the reason celebrities work so well in getting people to think about conditions and to go to their doctors.
Why do they work so well?
Because people trust celebrities. But they are not telling you often enough that they are on the [drug company’s] payroll. Of course, if they did tell you as often as they should, your trust might diminish somewhat.
Aren’t there enough sick people that the drug companies can target? Why try and convince others they’re sick?
The marketing people and the sophisticated PR people who work for them are doing what shareholders demand of them. They’re looking for ways to maximize markets. One way is to redefine more and more people as sick. There’s an informal alliance between the drug companies and aspects of the medical profession and aspects of the patient advocacy world who all seem to have interests in defining more and more people as ill. We look at this condition by condition in the book, and what you see is a similar formula or process at work. Every time a panel of experts come together, they want to nudge the boundaries a little further out, whether its mental illness, cholesterol or high blood pressure.
How do you think this is affecting the American psyche?
Asclepius was the Greek god for healing and one of his children was Panacea. She is one we all worship no matter if were Jewish or Christian or Muslim. We all want a panacea, particularly if were vulnerable or sick. The trouble is that there are vast commercial and professional forces trying to exploit the vulnerability we have and exploit our desire for a panacea. I don’t know what is happening to the American psyche. But I see a country bombarded with advertisements. We’re seeing fear of disease, decay and death becoming a central part of life. Id like people to investigate the psychic impact of being told 10 times a day you might actually be sick.
You’re from Australia, though you focus on the United States for this book. Is America unique?
The marketing strategies of pharmaceutical companies play out globally. However, the U.S. is the epicenter of the selling of sickness, of disease-mongering. Americans make up less than 5 percent of the worlds population but the U.S. makes up 50 percent of the drug market.
That doesn’t mean the U.S. takes 50 percent of pills.
That’s a relief.
But it does account for half of total spending on drugs. It’s still extraordinary. And it’s at the high end of pill taking.
Why is that?
The U.S. is different because it allows direct-to-consumer advertising [of prescription medications], which has taken off in a huge way in the past eight to 10 years. It’s been around a long time, but there was a loosening of the regulations in the mid- to late ’90s. New Zealand, too, is [unusual] in the world that way. In Australia and other countries, there is a strict ban on direct to consumer marketing. But so-called disease awareness programs, heavily funded by pharmaceutical companies, are not banned. So marketing strategies do play out in other places as well.
Have you heard from any drug companies since your book came out?
It’s been out for a month in Australia, and there hasn’t been anything out there to counter the journalism in my book. There’s been a very strong silence. The worrying thing about that is that it makes me think that I might be right.
If so, what do you hope would come from the book?
I hope a few more people become a bit more skeptical about the claims being made to them about drugs and disease, about the labels that are being attached to them, and the conditions they’re being told they have. Its time for all of us to be a bit more skeptical.
2005 Newsweek, Inc.
“We tend to forget that happiness doesn’t come as a result of getting something we don’t have, but rather of recognizing and appreciating what we do have.”
Remember, Today is the Tomorrow you worried about Yesterday!
By Sean Coughlan BBC News education and family correspondent1 February
Campaigners want to raise awareness of the link between loneliness and poor health
Loneliness is the “hidden killer” of elderly people, says a campaign group, which is calling for greater recognition of the link between isolation and ill-health.
A group of charities is launching the Campaign to End Loneliness.
It warns that lonely older people are at increased risk of depression, lack of exercise and bad diet.
The campaign says that almost one in 10 elderly people suffers from “intense” loneliness.
The campaign group wants loneliness to be recognised as a public health issue – and has published a survey claiming that fewer than one in five people is aware of the link between poor health and loneliness.
The campaign has been set up by Independent Age, Age UK Oxfordshire, Counsel and Care and WRVS and funded by the Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation.
While people are aware of the emotional problems of loneliness, the campaign says few recognise the physical damage.
It warns of elderly people trapped in their own homes by a lack of mobility and the loss of family and friends.
A tenth of elderly people see their friends or families less than once a month, says the charity
A lack of social interaction can make old people more vulnerable to depression and to problems such as excessive drinking, poor diet and a reduction in exercise.
The campaigners say that “loneliness adversely affects the immune and cardio-vascular systems” and a lack of social interaction is linked to the onset of Alzheimer’s disease.
“The problems of loneliness and isolation need to be put on an equal footing with any other condition associated with ageing. Ending loneliness should be part of the solution to the challenge of reforming care and support,” said campaign director Laura Ferguson.
The campaign wants to highlight the importance of loneliness in the lives of the elderly.
More than half of people over the age of 75 are living alone – and about one in 10 says he or she suffers from “intense” loneliness.
According to the campaign, almost one in five old people sees family, friends or neighbours less than once a week – and about one in 10 of them experiences such social interaction less than once a month.
A spokeswoman for the campaign says that there is a need for informal and formal attempts to tackle such loneliness, either through organised befriending schemes or through neighbours helping one another.
She said that it was a problem that was often overlooked and which could manifest itself in other ways, such as health problems.