The money spent to influence doctors tends to be in the service of newer drugs that are “fairly redundant.”
For more than five decades, the blood thinner Coumadin was the only option for millions of patients at risk for life-threatening blood clots. But now, a furious battle is underway among the makers of three newer competitors for the prescription pads of doctors across the country.
The manufacturers of these drugs — Pradaxa, Xarelto and Eliquis — have been wooing physicians in part by paying for meals, promotional speeches, consulting gigs and educational gifts. In the last five months of 2013, the companies spent nearly $19.4 million on doctors and teaching hospitals, according to ProPublica’s analysis of federal data released last fall
The state grand jury handed up the indictments against the four doctors and one chiropractor this morning. The medical practitioners were accused of taking kickbacks from Rehan Zuberi. Zuberi, 46, of Boonton, pleaded guilty last month to charges that he led a criminal enterprise that paid several million dollars of bribes and kickbacks to dozens of doctors from 2008 to 2014. The plea agreement calls for Zuberi to receive a 10-year state prison sentence with a four-year non-parole eligibility stipulation.
The latest data on payments from drug and device companies to doctors show that many doctors received payments on 100 or more days last year. Some received payments on more days than they didn't.
Few days went by last year when New Hampshire nephrologist Ana Stankovic didn't receive a payment from a drug company.
All told, 29 different pharmaceutical companies paid her $594,363 in 2014, mostly for promotional speaking and consulting, but also for travel expenses and meals, according to data released Tuesday detailing payments by drug and device companies to U.S. doctors and teaching hospitals. (You can search for your doctor on ProPublica's updated Dollars for Docs interactive database.)
Sul Bmj il caso di ColaLife, charity che distribuisce kit contro la diarrea in Africa. Un’operazione disinteressata?
La domanda è di quelle apparentemente innocue. È giusto far sponsorizzare a un’azienda iniziative che potrebbero migliorare la salute dei bambini?
A lanciarla è il British Medical Journal in uno dei suoi consueti Head to Head, un qualcosa che ricorda le interviste doppie delle Iene: una voce favorevole e una contraria e vediamo cosa succede.
Così, quella che sembrava una domanda innocua, si dimostra in fretta molto scivolosa.
Da una parte Simon Berry, Jane Berry e Rohit Ramchandani tra i fondatori o membri dalla ColaLife, charity nata da una costola della Coca-Cola e da altre aziende con un’idea geniale. «La Coca-Cola sembra essere dappertutto nei Paesi in via di sviluppo», spiega sul proprio sito. «Ma i farmaci essenziali no. Perché? ColaLife usa gli stessi principi e network della Coca-Cola» per distribuire un kit anti-diarrea di facile utilizzo e affidabile contenente sali per l’idratazione e supplementi di zinco.
Paris, le mardi 23 juin 2015 - L’URPS (Union régionale des professionnels de Santé) d’île de France a réalisé une enquête auprès de 2 822 médecins libéraux (hors chirurgiens, gériatres et néphrologues) sur les « exigences et incivilités des...
Healthcare is a high risk sector for corruption. Best estimates are that between 10% and 25% of global spend on public procurement of health is lost through corruption.1 This is big bucks. Total global spend on healthcare is more than $7 trillion each year. Corruption takes many forms, depending on the country’s level of development and health financing system.2 The United States, for example, lost between $82bn and $272bn in 2011 to medical embezzlement, mostly related to its health insurance system.3 No country is exempt from corruption. Patients everywhere are harmed when money is diverted to doctors’ pockets and away from priority services. Yet this complex challenge is one that medical professionals have failed to deal with, either by choosing to enrich themselves, turning a blind eye, or considering it too difficult. Transparency International, a watchdog on these matters, defines corruption as the abuse of entrusted power for private gain, which in healthcare encompasses bribery of regulators and medical professionals, manipulation of information on drug trials, diversion of medicines and supplies, corruption in procurement, and overbilling of insurance companies.4 This is no dirty little secret. It is one of the biggest open sores in medicine.
Health groups are petitioning the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to ban eight synthetic flavors in food that are known carcinogens.
The petition, led by the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), said the flavors, which have been used for over 40 years, are found in ice cream, candy, baked goods and beverages.
The petition asks FDA to revoke its 1964 approval that allowed seven of the eight flavorings to be used in food and overturn the industry’s 1974 self-approval of the eighth synthetic flavor, which they assert can be used under a loophole in the law for chemicals that are “generally recognized as safe.”
Businesses are increasingly relying on digital health services to improve their employees' wellness and prevent costly health problems, such as diabetes. Meanwhile, a group of stakeholders is developing an "artificial pancreas" that it hopes to bring to the market by 2018. Bloomberg Business, Wall Street Journal.
The dominant approach to hip fracture prevention is neither viable as a public health strategy nor cost effective. Pharmacotherapy can achieve at best a marginal reduction in hip fractures at the cost of unnecessary psychological harms, serious medical adverse events, and forgone opportunities to have greater impacts on the health of older people. As such, it is an intellectual fallacy we will live to regret.
Flaws in information submitted to Open Payments, a government database of financial relationships in the medical field, complicated our analysis.
You'd think drug and medical device makers would know how to spell the names of their own products.
But when companies submitted data to the federal governmentlast year on their payments to doctors, some got the product names wrong. Forest Laboratories misspelled its depression drug, Fetzima, as "Fetziima" 953 times — in more than one-third of all the reports on the drug. Medical device company Amedica Corp. sometimes called its Preference screw system "Preferance."
Amid much anticipation and after a lengthy delay, the government in September unveiled its Open Payments database, saying it would bring transparency to relationships between physicians and the drug and medical device industries. But this openness has been clouded by numerous errors that detract from its usefulness.
A series of articles in the New England Journal of Medicine has questioned whether the conflict of interest movement has gone too far in its campaign to stop the drug industry influencing the medical profession. Here, three former senior NEJM editors respond with dismay
A seriously flawed and inflammatory attack on conflict of interest policies and regulations appeared recently in a most unexpected location: the venerable and trusted New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM). In a series of rambling articles, one of the journal’s national correspondents, Lisa Rosenbaum, supported by the editor in chief, Jeffrey Drazen, tried to rationalise financial conflicts of interest in the medical profession.1 2 3 4 As former senior editors of the NEJM, we find it sad that the medical journal that first called attention to the problem of financial conflicts of interest among physicians would now backtrack so dramatically and indulge in personal attacks on those who disagree.
Eliminating five common risk factors would prevent more than half of all deaths from cardiovascular disease in the United States. Heart attack, stroke, and other cardiovascular diseases kill nearly three-quarters of a million Americans each year. They are the leading cause of death, accounting for nearly 30% of all deaths in the United States. But according to a new study published online yesterday in the Annals of Internal Medicine, many of these deaths can be prevented.
Dal bicchiere di vino presente sulle nostre tavole alla birra con gli amici; dallo spumante all’aperitivo. Sono tante e diverse le occasioni in cui beviamo alcol. Del resto: “Le bevande alcoliche fanno parte della nostra tradizione culturale, fanno parte anche della dieta mediterranea tradizionale” - dice il dottor Franco Berrino in apertura di questo video
It is essential that children in remote areas have access to regular supplies of oral rehydration salts and zinc; however, the link to Coca-Cola is an ethical minefield. While Coca-Cola can legitimately claim that it did not initiate the link, it undoubtedly benefits from the association, not least in the name ColaLife (I initially assumed it was funded by the company, although it is in fact independent) and in Coca-Cola’s logo appearing on historical ColaLife material posted on the web. Although today ColaLife’s kits have no direct distribution link with Coca-Cola, and the products make no reference to Coca-Cola or even to ColaLife, ColaLife still lends legitimacy to a company that markets some unhealthy products from which it makes huge profits while stoking obesity and diabetes epidemics. ColaLife also counts among its partners the alcoholic drinks multinational SABMiller, Coke’s bottlers in Zambia.
Aside from the ethical dangers of promoting unhealthy products, linking public health initiatives to companies such as Coca-Cola may be seriously problematic in other ways. Coca-Cola is ranked 11th in tax avoidance among the US multinational companies compared in a report by the US Senate published in 2012, with $13.9bn (£9bn; €12bn) in cash in offshore accounts.6 And similar behaviour has been noted in Vietnam and Greece.78 The development charity ActionAid has also accused SABMiller of organising its corporate structure to avoid paying tax in Africa, which the company refutes.9 Were these companies to engage in tax avoidance in countries like Zambia, the resulting loss of revenue would reduce the ability of those governments to fund preventive strategies such as efficient distribution of diarrhoeal treatment and more fundamental public health measures such as infrastructure for water and sanitation to protect children against diarrhoea.
It is emblematic of the unequal power relations between governments and huge multinationals, particularly in poor countries but also in the US, that whereas the Zambian government cannot ensure the supply of simple medicines to its clinics in remote areas, Coca-Cola has the resources to make sure its sugary products find their way into the mouths of children in the remotest areas.
They found that both exercise and arthroscopy improved knee pain. Arthroscopy was slightly better, improving pain by a small amount, which was described as the equivalent to using a painkiller such as paracetamol or ibuprofen. There was no difference between the interventions for function of the knee.
Current UK guidelines recommend arthroscopy for people with knee osteoarthritis and a clear history of "mechanical locking", where a person is unable to bend or straighten the knee. People with this symptom were not analysed separately in this research, so it remains unclear whether this recommendation would change on the basis of this study.
Before 2005, I did pay attention to the antivaccine movement, but it wasn’t one of my biggest priorities when it comes to promoting science-based medicine. That all changed when Robert F. Kennedy published his incredibly conspiracy-packed black whole of antivaccine pseudoscience entitled Deadly Immunity. Sadly, almost exactly ten years later, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. hasn’t…
Lorsque nous avons une envie de soda, nous hésitons souvent entre la version classique ou « light ».
Cette dernière est souvent plébiscitée, car elle est censée contenir moins de sucre, et donc être plus saine.
Même si nous savons tous que les sodas sont mauvais pour la santé, nous en buvons régulièrement car leur saveur nous plaît, et nous sommes persuadés qu’en consommer une fois de temps en temps, n’est pas si nocif pour notre santé.
Cependant, il est important de prendre en compte plusieurs facteurs.
Si vous ne souhaitez pas prendre de poids, la meilleure chose à faire est de ne pas consommer de soda, et encore moins de sodas estampillés « light », car plutôt que de vous aider à perdre du poids, ils augmentent la graisse abdominale.
Lisez cet article pour tout connaitre sur les sodas « light » et les risques qu’ils représentent pour votre santé.
Foundation (WLF), the The tobacco industry gains $7,000 for every one of the approximately 6 million people who die each year from smoking-related illness.
The study states than more than 5.8 trillion cigarettes were smoked last year, a figure similar to that from 2013. China is experiencing an increased tobacco use in China, while in other countries it decreases.
The World Lung Foundation and the American Cancer Society announced in their Tobacco Atlas that in 2013 the tobacco industry profits were almost $45 billion. In the same time, 6.3 million people lost their lives from smoking-related illness, which leads to an equivalent of $7,000 profit for each death caused by tobacco.
The controversial US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) guidelines that recommended against routine prostate cancer screening with the prostate specific antigen (PSA) test may be changing the practice of primary care physicians in the United States, two small studies have shown.
The USPSTF issued its recommendation in 2012 after concluding that the reduction in prostate cancer mortality 10 to 14 years after the introduction of PSA based screening was “at most, very small, even for men in the optimal age range of 55 to 69 years,” while the risk of harm from follow-up studies and treatment was substantial.1 The USPSTF recommendations applied to men without symptoms who did not have a history of prostate cancer.
Many urologists, however, have disagreed with the USPSTF’s conclusions, and the American Urological Association currently recommends that PSA screening should be based on a shared decision making process for men aged 55 to 69.2 Nevertheless, two studies presented on 17 May at the association’s annual meeting showed that the USPSTF recommendations may be reducing the use of PSA testing among primary care physicians.
In the first study, researchers at Oregon Health and Science University (OHSU) in Portland, Oregon, found that PSA testing by primary care physicians had dropped significantly after the USPSTF released its findings.3 OHSU is the home of the Northwest Evidence Based Practice Center, which provided the analysis on which the USPSTF based its recommendations.
In the study Ryan Werntz, lead author and urologic surgery resident at the university, and his colleagues compared PSA testing at OHSU’s Family Medicine and Internal Medicine clinics before and after the task force made its recommendations.
The researchers identified 12 345 men who were seen as a new patient appointment from 2008 to 2013. They found that, before the task force published its recommendations, 1463 (14%) of these patients received a PSA test, while after the recommendations were released only 223 (7%) were tested (P<0.0001).
No significant difference was found in PSA testing frequency before and after the 2012 recommendations in men aged 40 to 49 (4.2% v 4.4%) or in men over 70 (10.2% v 9.3%), but significant decreases were seen in PSA testing in men aged 50 to 59 (19.2% v 8.5%; P<0.0001) and 60 to 69 (19.3% v 7.7%; P<0.0001).
Sharing your scoops to your social media accounts is a must to distribute your curated content. Not only will it drive traffic and leads through your content, but it will help show your expertise with your followers.
How to integrate my topics' content to my website?
Integrating your curated content to your website or blog will allow you to increase your website visitors’ engagement, boost SEO and acquire new visitors. By redirecting your social media traffic to your website, Scoop.it will also help you generate more qualified traffic and leads from your curation work.
Distributing your curated content through a newsletter is a great way to nurture and engage your email subscribers will developing your traffic and visibility.
Creating engaging newsletters with your curated content is really easy.