TWiM # 3 is Live: Anthrax, Genomics and the FBI Inquiry

I am sure that almost all  BioJobBlog readers remember the anthrax attacks that followed shortly after September 11, 2001 attacks on the World Trade Centers and the Pentagon. After an extensive investigation by the FBI it was determined that Bruce Ivins, PhD a microbiologist at Fort Detrick, MD (who later committed suicide after being implicated) was likely responsible for the anthrax attacks that killed several people and injured others.

On episode #3 of the podcast This Week in Microbiology, Vincent, Cliff, Jo Handelsman  and Ron Atlas explore the genome analysis done in support of the Amerithrax investigation, and an insecticidal enterotoxin-deficient mutant of Bacillus thurigiensis a commonly used antimicrobial pesticide..

 To listen to TWiM # 3 please visit www.microbeworld.org or download it here. TWiM 3 podcast!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!!!!!!

 

Why Pharma May Never Be Good At Social Media

Johnson & Johnson is arguably one of the world leaders in bringing social media to the pharmaceutical industry. Marc Monseau and his dedicated team oversee a network of blogs, video channels and Twitter feeds while some of J&J’s brand companies even sponsor patient advocacy communities like ADHD Moms and ADHD Allies. However, the company’s recent handling of manufacturing problems and recall of Tylenol and other pediatric medicines seemingly flies in the face of openness and transparency; two of the underlying tenets and guiding principles of social media.

In an article in today’s New York Times, Natasha Singer reports that “a Congressional investigation into a recent recall of children’s Tylenol and other pediatric medicines has been stymied by the manufacturer, Johnson & Johnson, raising the prospect that new measures — like issuing of subpoenas to compel cooperation — could be invoked.”

McNeil Consumer Healthcare, the unit that manufacturers Tylenol and other over-the-counter medications, is no stranger to scrutiny by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). It is currently being investigated for a pattern of violations in manufacturing practice and quality control issues that have led to recalls of several medications. Last month, the agency suggested that it was considering criminal penalties or other actions against McNeil executives.

According to the times article, the House committee opened its investigation in early May shortly after McNeil announced a voluntary recall of liquid pediatric Tylenol, Motrin, Benadryl and Zyrtec. FDA investigators uncovered evidence that the products, made at a company plant in Fort Washington, Pa., may have included metal particles, or too much of the active drug ingredient, or inactive ingredients that did not meet testing standards.”

Manufacturing problems are not uncommon in the pharmaceutical industry and it isn’t clear what J&J has to lose by not fully cooperating with FDA officials. In fact, failure to cooperate could lead to harsher penalties and larger fines. However, I suspect that McNeil hasn’t been forthcoming because of allegations of a so-called “phantom recall” that took place last year, where J&J contractors secretly removed alleged defective products from store shelves.” Nevertheless, ongoing media coverage of the recall and the circumstances behind it are beginning to cast a very negative light on McNeil products and the J&J brand.

Pharmaceutical social media advocates contend that one of the reasons why pharma companies ought to use social media tools is information dissemination and so-called damage or crisis control. While I haven’t been assiduously screening all of the J&J social media channels, it seems like now would be an ideal time to begin to leverage them. 

It is unfortunate that an innovative and progressive pharmaceutical company like J&J has come under fire. However, product quality and safety is of paramount importance to consumers. And companies that cannot ensure those product attributes must move quickly and decisively to reinstate them. To that end, J&J ought to fully cooperate with FDA regulators, fix its Tylenol problems and then use its abundant social media channels to reinstate public confidence in McNeil Consumer Healthcare and the J&J brand! After all, isn’t that what social media is all about?

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!!!!

 

A Preemptive Strike: US Medical Devices DTC Advertising Comes Under Fire

Just when the medical device industry is gaining steam and poised to challenge pharma and biotech companies for market share and profits, some lawmakers have begun to question the medical devices industry’s direct-to-consumer (DTC) advertising practices. Last year, the medical device industry spent about $193 million for DTC advertising on television and the Internet—a mere fraction of what was spent on DTC consumer advertising for prescription drugs sold by pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies.

One reason given by lawmakers to justify its current scrutiny of medical devices DTC advertising practices is that “medical devices can have more of an impact on a patient’s well-being than a drug because devices often require surgery to implant and may remain inside the body for years.” However, in response, a representative from the Advanced Medical Technology Association, a medical devices trade group said, “While an advertisement may stimulate a patient to ask a doctor about device, the process of receiving one involves a discussion of its benefits and risks.” He went on to say “You may take a pill because it doesn’t involve very much. But you don’t undergo surgery unless you think you have a serious need for it.” 

Another reason cited by Herb Kohl, a Democrat from Wisconsin is “The medical device industry is just beginning to get into the game.” Yes, Mr Kohl’s assertion is absolutely correct. Unlike most pharma and biotechnology companies, which have engaged in unregulated DTC advertising for the past 10 years or so—and literally made billions— the medical devices industry was slow to recognize that DTC advertising could be used to effectively hawk its products. I guess the thought here is: “to head ‘em off at the pass!”

The current call for an investigation into the DTC practices of some medical devices companies raises several interesting questions. First, is the investigation simply a red herring to distract FDA from crafting new regulations to rein in and more tightly control DTC advertising by pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies? (While FDA has recently revised some of its DTC advertising guidelines, the changes are still not rigorous enough). Second, could the call for increased scrutiny of the medical devices industry simply be an attempt (by pharma and biotech lobbyists) to stifle the recent, explosive growth of the medical devices industry?  Finally, why are lawmakers rather than the agency (which oversees the device industry) investigating the DTC advertising practices of medical devices companies?

On a personal note, I support tighter regulations and increased scrutiny of the DTC advertising practices for all  life sciences companies. Although DTC ads are directly aimed at consumers, their real purpose is to influence prescribing practices of physicians by inducing patients to ask questions about whether or not the drugs or devices that they “saw on TV” are appropriate for them. That said, I believe that it is up to FDA to insure that all DTC ads are fairly balanced (risks vs. benefits) and medically accurate before they are viewed by the American public.

Until next time…

 

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!!!!!!!