Multinational pharmaceutical firms have taken to lobbying government ministers directly in an effort to obtain wider markets for their new and costly medications. Specifically mentioned in today's Guardian article are Pfizer, Eli Lily, Johnson & Johnson and Bristol-Meyers Squib. The pressure was specifically towards decisions taken by NICE* (National Institute for Clinical Excellence) that several new (and expensive) Alzheimer drugs should receive only limited use under the NHS. NICE decided that there was little evidence that the new drugs represented material improvements over existing drugs and only approved their use only in limited circumstances.
Pfizer is specifically accused of making thinly veiled threats to take its business elsewhere. Drug companies represent about a quarter of the UK's manufacturing base and is worth about 3.5 billion GBP annually. The industry as a whole operates on a higher gross profit margin than any other industry sector.
In a similar vein The Times reported last week that drug firms also use funding of health charities, often specifically targeted towards specific events or projects that could provide favourable publicity for their business.
Even The Pusher didn't go to these lengths.
*Note: NICE is charged with vetting new drugs and other treatments to determine clinical value and cost effectiveness. It decides whether a new treatment will be available on the NHS and how wide its utilisation will be. Their decisions are not without controversy and often strongly condemned and protested by lobby groups be they from industry, the medical community and the wider public. The recent controversy over breast cancer drug Herceptin is a case in point. (Before the right wing Yanks start screaming "rationing" I recognise that there is a measure of rationing in any system, single payer or otherwise. Taken a hard look at the American system and tell there isn't rationing of care and treatment in America. Those with money and good insurance get excellent care with the most current and expensive therapies. Those without the funds or insurance get limited care, poor care or no care!)
Pfizer is specifically accused of making thinly veiled threats to take its business elsewhere. Drug companies represent about a quarter of the UK's manufacturing base and is worth about 3.5 billion GBP annually. The industry as a whole operates on a higher gross profit margin than any other industry sector.
In a similar vein The Times reported last week that drug firms also use funding of health charities, often specifically targeted towards specific events or projects that could provide favourable publicity for their business.
Even The Pusher didn't go to these lengths.
*Note: NICE is charged with vetting new drugs and other treatments to determine clinical value and cost effectiveness. It decides whether a new treatment will be available on the NHS and how wide its utilisation will be. Their decisions are not without controversy and often strongly condemned and protested by lobby groups be they from industry, the medical community and the wider public. The recent controversy over breast cancer drug Herceptin is a case in point. (Before the right wing Yanks start screaming "rationing" I recognise that there is a measure of rationing in any system, single payer or otherwise. Taken a hard look at the American system and tell there isn't rationing of care and treatment in America. Those with money and good insurance get excellent care with the most current and expensive therapies. Those without the funds or insurance get limited care, poor care or no care!)
No comments:
Post a Comment