Transcript - Science for
Sale?
NARRATION: Through drug advertisements costing
billions….Madison Ave has turned patients into a potent sales
force…influencing which drugs their doctors prescribe.
NARRATION: For the big pharmaceutical companies, these campaigns
have been an unquestioned success, boosting sales…making brand name drugs
as recognizable as the latest movie star. It's what advertising agencies
do well: to unabashedly promote and sell products.
NARRATION: But now, Madison Ave, is quietly engaged in a much
different campaign. To help create the next generation of blockbuster
drugs, ad agencies are buying or investing in companies engaged in the
actual science of drug development….including organizing clinical trials.
Some ad agencies also own companies that ghostwrite scientific
journals…and design medical education courses.
BODENHEIMER: The hidden hand of Madison Avenue is having an
enormous effect on the prescribing habits of physicians in this country.
NARRATION: And that deeply worries some doctors.
RELMAN: Ad agencies are not in the business of doing science.
They're not qualified to do science. They're not qualified to carry out
clinical investigation, and they don't belong there.
NARRATION: For 14 years, Dr. Arnold Relman edited the New
England Journal of Medicine.
RELMAN: These people make their living by promoting the sales of
drugs. TORRE: Some scientific people are worried that marketing
might influence the science of a drug. That really can't happen.
NARRATION: Joe Torre…not to be confused with the baseball
manager…is the award-winning, Ferrari-driving chief executive of the ad
agency, Torre Lazur. It's known as the launch agency.
TORRE: We've launched over 65 new pharmaceutical products.
NARRATION: And to help launch even more products, Torre Lazur
early this year bought its own clinical research firm, Target Research
Associates…so the agency no longer merely markets new drugs, it now
studies the benefits and dangers of experimental drugs.
TORRE: We provide services that go from the beginning of drug
development all the way to the launch of your products.
WALT: From soup to nuts.
TORRE: From soup to nuts.
WALT: Is that new for advertising agencies?
TORRE: I'd say within the last decade it's new. Prior to that,
advertising agencies used to be just that - advertising agencies.
NARRATION: According to Dr. Thomas Bodenheimer, clinical drug
trials used to be performed mostly by academic medical centers. But in the
New England Journal of Medicine, he writes that these trials are
increasingly being done by private research companies like Target.
BODENHEIMER: Their only income comes from drug companies that
contract with them to do these clinical drug trials, so they really have
no independence from the drug companies.
BODENHEIMER: Their purpose is not scientific truth. So they can
decide which data to publicize, and which data to bury.
NARRATION: Such worries are baseless, says Lloyd Baroody, who
heads Target Research.
BAROODY: It's totally against the rules and it could be
criminal. I can't imagine any colleague of mine in my company or in the
industry that would put marketing before research in terms of trying to
say something about a drug that only emphasizes the most favorable
elements but buries the unfavorable elements. You know, it's just, it's
just generally - I can't imagine it happening. I really can't.
RELMAN: He kept a straight face when he said that?
WALT: You don't believe it?
RELMAN: On the face of it, that's ridiculous.
NARRATION: A view shared by Dr. Eric Topol, who chairs the
department of cardiovascular medicine at The Cleveland Clinic.
WALT: Is there a place for advertising agencies or their
representatives in designing clinical trials and promoting the results of
those trials?
TOPOL: Well, actually this is pretty scary to me. This is what I
would label "bad chemistry." If this is where clinical research is headed,
that would be a terrible negative trajectory.
NARRATION: A case in point, says Dr. Topol…. the new pain
reliever Bextra. The Food and Drug Administration approved Bextra for mild
pain like arthritis, but not for acute pain. Even so, six months later a
private research company - Scirex - partly owned by the ad agency Omnicom,
released a new study showing that Bextra did relieve acute pain from
dental surgery. Bextra can't be advertised for acute pain, but doctors are
free to prescribe it for that purpose.
TOPOL: It looked like the deck was stacked for Bextra - no
surprise of course.
NARRATION: Dr. Topol said the study's conclusions were based on
a sample size …that may have been too small and too healthy. He has also
criticized other studies of pain relievers in the same class of drugs as
Bextra.
TOPOL: The question is, why can't they do the trials right? They
have so much revenue and income. To do a trial done in the right way with
independent investigators, with the right type of statistics and sample
size and population is relatively little cost.
NARRATION: The ad agency Omnicom, which announced that it was
investing in Scirex to - quote -- get closer to the test tube -- tells The
New York Times in response to our questions that it has no influence over
Scirex's management or the design of clinical studies. Scirex would not
return our calls.
NEWS BROADCASTS: [Various news broadcasts trumpeting new
studies.]
NARRATION: New medical studies, trumpeted frequently on the
evening news, are important because they help doctors decide which drugs
to prescribe…directly affecting the cost and quality of patient care.
NARRATION: Linda Logdberg knows the importance of these studies.
She has written about them for medical journals.
WALT: If I were to look up the research papers that you wrote,
would I find your name on them?
LOGDBERG: No, you would not find my name on them.
WALT: You're a ghostwriter.
LOGDBERG: I'm a ghostwriter.
NARRATION: In other words, doctors take credit for authoring
studies that Linda Logdberg wrote. Though leading medical journals
disapprove of ghostwriting, Dr. Logdberg -she has a doctorate in anatomy
-- didn't object as long as the research was presented fairly and
objectively. But she says that when business executives at advertising
agencies began telling her what to write, she grew increasingly
uncomfortable.
WALT: You are a bit like the puppeteer. You pull the strings and
the doctors dance.
LOGDBERG: I pull the strings after being told how to pull the
strings.
WALT: Who is telling you pull the strings?
LOGDBERG: My contact at the medical education company.
WALT: Which is owned by -
LOGDBERG: An advertising agency.
NARRATION: Dr. Logdberg says that several months ago she got a
call from Intramed, a company that educates doctors about new developments
in medicine. It's owned by the marketing company, Sudler & Hennessey,
which in turn is owned by the global ad agency, WPP.
LOGDBERG: They asked me to rewrite an article that they were not
happy with.
WALT: Why weren't they happy with it?
LOGDBERG: They felt it was rambling and that it didn't make the
points that they wanted to see made.
NARRATION: The research paper - on Attention Deficity
Hyperactivity Disorder -- was also deemed unsatisfactory by Novartis, the
maker of Ritalin L.A., a drug used to treat the disorder. New York Times
reporter Melody Petersen obtained a transcript of a telephone conversation
that shows just how hard Intramed and Novartis worked behind the scenes to
get the paper written - the way they wanted it written - even though the
relevant clinical trial for Ritalin L.A. had yet to begin.
PETERSEN: The company wanted what he called a quote, quick, down
and dirty article that could be published very quickly.
NARRATION: And while Novartis told the authors to stick to known
facts, they should feel free to hint at what future research might show,
according to the transcript. And to make sure the article turned out the
way the drug company wanted --
PETERSEN: An Intramed executive told the doctors that it would
give them an outline and a draft of the paper which then they could edit.
NARRATION: Novartis said it was not the article's intent to
promote any specific drug. Intramed declined to appear on camera to
discuss this research paper, which is awaiting publication. But Jed
Beitler, chief executive of Intramed's parent company, Sudler &
Hennessey, did speak to Melody Petersen.
PETERSEN: Mr. Beitler said Intramed may make editorial
suggestions to authors but that it does not ghost write. He said that in
this case, the doctors had originally written a piece that was far too
long. So, Intramed had written a draft to show them how it could be scaled
down.
NARRATION: Even so, Dr. Logdberg was called in for a rewrite,
which Intramed also didn't like. For now, Dr. Logdberg says she has quit
ghostwriting because marketing executives - not scientists or researchers
- were shaping what she wrote. Today she teaches science to students…
working longer hours for less money.
LOGDBERG: What I mind is advertising that calls itself
education. And I became increasingly uncomfortable with providing content
for that.
NARRATION: Someone who says he has been on the receiving end of
Intramed's medical education is retired psychiatrist, Dr. Richard Brown.
He says that education was accompanied by a $500 check, wine and a free
dinner at Daniel, one of the most elegant, and expensive restaurants in
New York City.
NARRATION: Dr. Brown invited us to come along to document the
free dinners he was getting from the drug industry. He says he wants to
end the practice.
BROWN: I am disgusted by the fact that these pharmaceutical
companies can charge so much for drugs, such that poor people have to
stretch their budgets to pay for food and heating fuel, and so forth, as
well as the, the high costs of drugs, and the drug companies, at the same
time, can give these lavish dinners. And I think it's disgusting, and I
think this ought to be brought to the attention of the American people.
NARRATION: Drug companies that offer such lavish treatment to
induce doctors to prescribe certain drugs, have been warned by federal
health officials that they could be prosecuted under anti-kickback laws.
But Intramed - in this case working for the drug company Forest
Laboratories - insists it did nothing wrong because doctors attending the
dinners were there as consultants.
RELMAN: It's nonsense. If you look into it, the doctors who are
being paid ostensibly as consultants are, are doing nothing of any
consequence to earn their money.
WALT: Do you do any consulting?
BROWN: Of course not.
RELMAN: They're clearly there because they are quote, either big
prescribers or opinion leaders and they can influence the sales of drugs.
So the whole thing is a scam - it's simply a way to sell more drugs.
NARRATION: Several weeks after the Daniel dinner, we caught up
with Dr. Brown after another dinner - this time at a Manhattan steak
house. It, too, was underwritten by Forest Laboratories.
BROWN: The dinner is so gigantic that I could only eat part of
it. So, I put the rest in my doggie bag.
NARRATION: Days later, we watched as Dr. Brown was about to
collect his third free dinner.
WALT: Good night.
BROWN: Good night.
NARRATION: Tonight, Dr. Brown would again pick up a $500 check…
this time it was the pharmaceutical company, Eli Lilly, using another
marketing firm to arrange the event. Dr. Brown says he had earlier turned
down his fourth free dinner at the Four Seasons Hotel. Instead, he
organized a protest outside as Forest Labs wined and dined doctors inside.
NARRATION: Forest Labs would not return our phone calls. But Eli
Lilly and Intramed told Melody Petersen that their meetings were proper,
and were designed to get feedback from doctors on specific drugs.
NARRATION: Joe Torre, the ad agency executive, says dinner
meetings, often chaired by other doctors, help drug companies sell their
products.
TORRE: Very often doctors are more influenced by what other
doctors say than what pharmaceutical companies say. So companies work
through medical education companies to have doctors who support their
products talk about their products in a favorable way. That's called
medical education.
WALT: How do you know that works?
TORRE: They have studies that show before and after in terms of
prescribing practices.
NARRATION: Intramed reaches out to potential prescribers even
before they can legally prescribe drugs. Last month, Intramed arranged for
medical students from dozens of schools to spend a weekend in Manhattan,
including two nights at the Plaza Hotel, dinners and a Broadway play. The
purpose of the visit: a university conference on psychiatry and
neuroscience, underwritten by Forest Labs, which makes antidepressants.
NARRATION: Lenard Lesser, a medical student at the University of
Rochester, sent a letter to conference organizers protesting Forest Lab's
involvement.
WALT: Your fellow medical students from around the country right
now are settling into what promises to be a very nice dinner at the
world-famous Plaza Hotel. Why aren't you with them?
LESSER: Because I believe that Forest pharmaceutical company is
sponsoring this conference for an economic gain for themselves. They're
trying to establish a relationship with medical students.
NARRATION: Intramed did not want us to videotape the medical
students getting their free drinks and dinner inside the Plaza.
RELMAN: If what you're doing cannot be fully disclosed to the
public, its wrong.
NARRATION: But the larger question remains: why ad agencies feel
the need to get involved in early drug development. Mr. Baroody, the head
of Target Research, says marketing executives can help target medical
conditions that might be fertile ground for the development of new
blockbuster drugs.
BAROODY: Drug development should to a large extent be marketing
driven because, after all, drug companies are for profit institutions out
to make a profit.
NARRATION: In the creative minds of some advertising executives,
this is how promotion comes together with science. Produced by a company
partly owned by Omnicom, this ad suggests: "Even good science needs a
little magic."
WALT: Well, does science need a little magic every now and then?
RELMAN: No.
WALT: What does it need?
RELMAN: It needs hard work, imagination, honesty, integrity, um,
logic. It needs data. We don't get anywhere in medicine without objective
data. That's the coin of the realm. These companies are not really
qualified to do that, and they're not motivated to do that. Their job is
to please their clients.
NARRATION: Last year, with health care costs rising sharply once
again, spending on prescription drugs rose nearly 14 percent. And Fortune
magazine ranks the pharmaceutical industry as the most profitable in
America.
RELMAN: Doctors are led to prescribe drugs that may not be
necessarily worth the money, may not be better than a generic that's
already on the market and that their, that their patients don't really
need. It's clearly contributing to the rising costs of prescription drugs
and health care in general. And I don't think the public should stand for
it much longer. The public ought to say to the medical profession - stop
it. And the medical professional could easily stop it if they want to.
|