But the $258 lunch could easily return thousands of dollars, the Times points out, in prescriptions for Fosamax and Singulair, "the two drugs discussed during lunch with two Merck representatives."
Dr Scott cited several studies that found the lunches and other small gifts and free drug samples do lead doctors to prescribe the more expensive brand names when cheaper generic versions of the same drugs are available and effective.
These concerns have resulted in an effort to ban the free meals. The hospital at the University of Pennsylvania began barring industry-paid lunches, effective July 1, 2007, its medical director, Dr Patrick Brennan told the New York Times.
"It curries favor and it creates influence, and it introduces influences into decision-making processes that we think ought not to be there," he said.
The University of Michigan Health System barred drug company sponsored lunches last year, and according to the Times, officials estimate the lunches had been worth $2.5 million annually.
According to Merck there were no signs of the ONJ in clinical trials sponsored by the company. However, a deeper look at Merck's studies reveals the company often maintains total control over what studies are published.
For instance, for a 2002 paper touting the benefits of Fosamax for the treatment of osteoporosis, the paper's lead author, Susan Greenspan, was a professor at Harvard Medical School at the time, and Merck (1) paid for the recruitment and participation of 327 study subjects; (2) collected the data from 25 separate study sites; (3) coordinated the early phases of the study; and (4) provided expertise in study conduct. Merck also retained full control and ownership of the research.
Moreover, these days universities have all kinds of conflicts of interest stemming from financial ties to the industry. For example, according to an April 12, 2006, article in The Phoenix, overall, Harvard Medical School now receives nearly a quarter of its research funding from nonfederal sources, including to $2.1 million from Merck, and a recent Harvard SEC filing shows a holdings of $16 million worth of Merck stock.
In any event, according to Dr Eric Colman, of the FDA's Division of Endocrine and Metabolic Drugs, serious adverse reactions that may not have been apparent in pre-marketing studies emerge in half of all approved prescription drugs. "People need to realize there are unknown side effects with every drug, and these medications are no exception," he told the LA Times..
For Dr Lucavage, the whole situation involving ONJ has been very frustrating, especially watching patients suffer, he says, while drug companies delayed going public about the risks. "One drug company did not come out with the update to their circular until about three or four months ago," he told Argus-News. "We were seeing this three years ago."
"I said to my partners several years ago," he says, "this is a class action suit waiting to happen."
Apparently, the doctor is psychic because on July 11, 2006, the LA Times reported: "As Merck & Co. defends itself against a deluge of litigation involving its pain reliever Vioxx, the pharmaceutical giant also is fielding the first of what could be another wave of lawsuits involving Fosamax, its second-biggest seller."
For more information for injured parties go to Lawyers and Settlements.com
http://www.lawyersandsettlements.com/articles/fosamax_merck.html
Evelyn Pringle
evelyn.pringle@sbcglobal.net
(Evelyn Pringle is a columnist for OpEd News and an investigative journalist focused on exposing corruption in government and corporate America)
Dr Scott cited several studies that found the lunches and other small gifts and free drug samples do lead doctors to prescribe the more expensive brand names when cheaper generic versions of the same drugs are available and effective.
These concerns have resulted in an effort to ban the free meals. The hospital at the University of Pennsylvania began barring industry-paid lunches, effective July 1, 2007, its medical director, Dr Patrick Brennan told the New York Times.
"It curries favor and it creates influence, and it introduces influences into decision-making processes that we think ought not to be there," he said.
According to Merck there were no signs of the ONJ in clinical trials sponsored by the company. However, a deeper look at Merck's studies reveals the company often maintains total control over what studies are published.
For instance, for a 2002 paper touting the benefits of Fosamax for the treatment of osteoporosis, the paper's lead author, Susan Greenspan, was a professor at Harvard Medical School at the time, and Merck (1) paid for the recruitment and participation of 327 study subjects; (2) collected the data from 25 separate study sites; (3) coordinated the early phases of the study; and (4) provided expertise in study conduct. Merck also retained full control and ownership of the research.
Moreover, these days universities have all kinds of conflicts of interest stemming from financial ties to the industry. For example, according to an April 12, 2006, article in The Phoenix, overall, Harvard Medical School now receives nearly a quarter of its research funding from nonfederal sources, including to $2.1 million from Merck, and a recent Harvard SEC filing shows a holdings of $16 million worth of Merck stock.
In any event, according to Dr Eric Colman, of the FDA's Division of Endocrine and Metabolic Drugs, serious adverse reactions that may not have been apparent in pre-marketing studies emerge in half of all approved prescription drugs. "People need to realize there are unknown side effects with every drug, and these medications are no exception," he told the LA Times..
For Dr Lucavage, the whole situation involving ONJ has been very frustrating, especially watching patients suffer, he says, while drug companies delayed going public about the risks. "One drug company did not come out with the update to their circular until about three or four months ago," he told Argus-News. "We were seeing this three years ago."
"I said to my partners several years ago," he says, "this is a class action suit waiting to happen."
Apparently, the doctor is psychic because on July 11, 2006, the LA Times reported: "As Merck & Co. defends itself against a deluge of litigation involving its pain reliever Vioxx, the pharmaceutical giant also is fielding the first of what could be another wave of lawsuits involving Fosamax, its second-biggest seller."
For more information for injured parties go to Lawyers and Settlements.com
http://www.lawyersandsettlements.com/articles/fosamax_merck.html
Evelyn Pringle
evelyn.pringle@sbcglobal.net
(Evelyn Pringle is a columnist for OpEd News and an investigative journalist focused on exposing corruption in government and corporate America)
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
