What happened to our drug companies?
Merck’s decision to pull Vioxx from the market was reported as a “shock” by the major media. Yet, the problems with Vioxx have been known and well-documented for years – years in which Merck aggressively and continually promoted the drug, allegedly in the face of strong evidence that prolonged exposure could cause elevated blood pressure and strokes.
Why? Short term profits? Myopic upper management? Pressures of the stock market?
The Vioxx controversy is not an isolated event. For at least 10 years, Paxil and other SSRIs (selective serotonin uptake inhibitors) have been linked to aggressive psychotic behaviors and suicide, both in children and adults.
But only when the British government ruled that the risks of using Paxil far stripped any potential positive effects did the Food & Drug Administration step in. The solution: warning labels.
Are we to believe that a warning label would be a comfort to parents whose otherwise healthy teenager just committed suicide?
Unfortunately, the troubles don’t stop here. The New York Times reported on June 27, 2004, that a major drug manufacturer was sending unsolicited checks in amounts ranging from $10,000 to six figures to doctors. The checks were called “consulting fees,” even though no work was required.
The message here was simple: Take the money, prescribe the drugs, ignore less expensive alternatives. The checks and the arrangements which spawned them are under investigation by federal officials.
A September 2004 AARP Bulletin quote by Dr. Marcia Angell, former editor of the New England Journal of Medicine and now a senior lecturer at the Harvard Medical School, offers some possible insight: “The industry’s best kept secret is that it’s not very innovative at all. In 2002 the FDA approved 78 new drugs, of which only seven were truly innovative.” Surprisingly, the “Big Pharma” companies now spend more money on advertising than on research.
Medicine continues to make new and astounding discoveries, but as often as not, the drug companies oppose rather than embrace them, for reasons difficult to fathom. For example, 20 years ago common ulcers were found to be caused by an unusual bacteria, Helicobacter pylori, treatable by antibiotics. Fifteen years passed before this information became generally available during which time drug companies routinely advertised products which did little but mask the symptoms.
Recently, Crohn’s Disease has been linked conclusively to another bacteria, Mycobacteria paratuberculosis. The drug companies, rather than embracing a new paradigm, are continuing to fund research and advertise products which, again, mask the symptoms and do not cure the disease.
Another group of forefront researchers have linked diseases of the arteries to a protozoan infection by Chlamydia pneumonia. Other research links certain forms of asthma with a difficult to detect fungal infection. There is little indication that the major drug companies are funding or following this research.
Big Pharma’s focus appears to be on promotion and advertising. Rarely does an hour go by on mainstream television without drug ads. Company websites look like disease information, but in reality are thinly disguised advertising. It’s a huge effort, manipulating the public into buying drugs discovered years ago for amounts of money that border on the obscene.
Take Taxol for example. Taxol is an important anti-cancer drug, discovered by the National Cancer Institute at a cost of over $183 million taxpayer funded dollars. The mechanism for chemical synthesis was then developed under an NIH grant at Florida State University. The research was completed with human trials, which were deemed successful in the late 1980s. The total of United States public moneys invested: over $200 million dollars.
Bristol Myers Squibb was reportedly given the exclusive rights to market Taxol, as long as they provided the drug at “reasonable terms.” Currently, one year’s treatment currently costs $20,000 … hardly reasonable terms. To date, sales of Taxol have grossed over $9 billion dollars. According to Dr. Angell, Squibb has paid royalties to the NIH of only $35 million dollars, not even breakeven on our money for a blockbuster drug.
The current drug company fiascos are recent and clear-cut examples of a broader, systemic reach of ethical collapse.
New York Times writers fabricate stories, CBS News’ problems are now over reported, business leaders are indicted every week, drug companies manipulate the public into buying aging treatments for exorbitant prices.
What’s going on?
Rarely do we consider the effect that a leader has on the culture that surrounds us. Eight years of Bill Clinton were highlighted by the stock market bubble, economic outsourcing and an emphasis on short-term profits, short-term planning, and the seduction of an intern simply because he could. Four years of George W. Bush have been dominated by Iraq, Sept. 11, and worldwide terrorism.
The question we need to ask is what kind of culture do we have now, where do we want to be, and how do we get there.
The choice for president is more than a choice between parties. It’s a direction.
And leadership is more than the person at the top. It’s the culture he or she embraces. It’s the compassion and personal accountability of John Kennedy, Ronald Reagan, Dwight Eisenhower and Abraham Lincoln – who elevated all around them.
In contrast, leaders like William McKinley, Herbert Hoover and Bill Clinton diminished us – both by their actions and the culture they defined. William McKinley will always be linked to corruption and scandal, Herbert Hoover to systemic financial chaos and Bill Clinton to casual infidelity and an attempt to redefine the word “is.”
The presidential debates have clarified our choice: substance and resolve on the one side and verbal skills and fluid thinking on the other.
The problems with Big Pharma are simply current examples of a culture which has embraced manipulation, greed and prevarication for short-term profit. We desperately need to change our culture to reflect truth, accountability and fidelity … those qualities the Ten Commandments speak to.
Chris Bennett manages an environmental engineering division for a West Coast technology firm. He and his wife of 26 years make their home on the San Francisco Bay.
