Bio Job Blog : Bio Jobs : Biotechnology Jobs : Biopharmaceutical Jobs : Bioscience, Biotech Jobs : Bio Job Blog : Biocareer : Bio-Business Training, Biotechnology Training : Jobs in Biology : Internships in Biology : Internships in Biotechnology

For additional information, including registration, please click here to visit the event website. Use promo code BC for a discounted rate of $175.

Date: Thursday, January 26, 2012
Time: 8:00 a.m. - 1:00 p.m.
Place: The Graduate Center of The City University of NY; 365 5th Ave; NY, NY 10016
Registration Fee: $195.00
Website: http://www.bdionline.com/mobilehealthcare2012.html

Representatives from the following companies are currently registered to attend: Affect Strategies; Alembic Health Communications; Allergan; Anderson Direct Marketing; Aurora Information Technology, Inc.; Baldwin Publishing; BlippMedia; Bristol-Myers Squibb Company; Brodeur Partners; Care Innovations; Cinchcast; CMI/Compas; ConferencePlus; Daiichi-Sankyo; DKI; Draftfcb Healthcare; DraftFCB/NeON; Edelman; eurorscg; Eveo; FreeMind; GCI Health; Google; Hale Advisors Inc.; hamad medical corporation; Huntington Hospital; HY Connect; IMC2 Health and Wellness; International Association of Business Communicators; Kwittken + Company; Makovsky & Co; Manhattan Research; Mom Central Consulting; Mount Sinai Hospital; MultiVu; NNN; Ogilvy; Padilla Speer Beardsley; Pharma Marketing News / Pharma Marketing Blog; Physicians Interactive; Pixels & Pills; Porter Novelli; PR Newswire; PRN Communications Inc; Public Relations Society of America - New York Chapter; SAY Media; Shire; State University of New York Buffalo; Stephanie Grayson; ToGoRun; Trident Communications; Turning Point Solutions, Inc.; United Healthcare; Velocidi; Wake Forest Baptist Health; WCG; Wharton, University of Pennsylvania; Within3; Yankee Public Relations; and others.

Attendee Testimonials:
Click here to see what our past attendees are saying about us.

About the Event:
Consumers and professionals are increasingly using their mobile devices for healthcare information. They are also interacting with healthcare providers and colleagues on their mobile phones. This conference will demonstrate the best case studies of how major healthcare brands are connecting with consumers and professionals through mobile communications. 

Agenda:
 

Roundtable Moderators:
Meighan Berberich, Vice President, Marketing, Cinchcast
James Chase, Editor-in-Chief, Medical Marketing & Media
George DeTorres, Divisional Vice President - Business Development, MultiVu
Rob Drasin, President, International Association of Business Communicators New York & President, Trident Communications
Sandra Fathi, President, Public Relations Society of America - New York Chapter & President and Founder, Affect 
Peter Gannon, Regional Vice President, Within3
Scott Hopkins, Executive Vice President, Anderson Direct Marketing
Theresa Jacobellis, Director of Public Affairs, Huntington Hospital 
Monique Levy, Vice President, Research, Manhattan Research
John Mack, Editor and Publisher, Pharma Marketing News / Pharma Marketing Blog 
Dr. Katherine Malbon, Assistant Professor of Pediatrics, Division of Adolescent Medicine, Mount Sinai Hospital
Talya Miron-Shatz, PhD, Marketing Department, Wharton, University of Pennsylvania 
Jenna Mons, Consumer Product Manager for LAP-BAND®, Allergan 
Mario Nacinovich, Jr., Editor-in-Chief, Journal of Communication in Healthcare; Managing Director, AXON
Xavier Petit, Shire

Hotel Sponsor: Hotel 373 is the official hotel of BDI's events.

Sponsors:
PR Newswire / MultiVu; Within3; Anderson Direct Marketing; BioCrowd; Cinchcast; FierceMarkets; International Association of Business Communicators - New York Chapter; Journal of Communication in Healthcare; Manhattan Research; Mobile Marketing & Media; New York American Marketing Association; New York University; Pharma Marketing News; Pixels and Pills; Public Relations Society of America - New York Chapter; Sales Lead Management Association; Society for Healthcare Strategy and Market Development

For event related questions and registration, please contact Maria Feola-Magro at mfeola@bdionline.com or 212.765.8043.
For sponsorship/speaking opportunities, including pricing, please click here or contact Jennifer Brous at jbrous@bdionline.com or 212-765-8358

For additional information, including registration, please click here to visit the event website. Use promo code BC for a discounted rate of $175.

About BDI:
Business Development Institute (BDI), founded in New York City by Steve Etzler in 2001 and managed by Maria Feola, produces conferences and educational programs for marketing, communications and media professionals. Over 11,000 attendees have participated in our programs. We specialize in how technology and the internet impacts marketing, communications and media. Our programs educate while providing valuable networking opportunities to our attendees. The quality of our speakers, program topics, 1/2 day format, network, and value are what differentiates BDI from its competitors. Follow us on Twitter at www.twitter.com/bdionline. For additional information as well as sponsorship information, please download our Media Kit.

What we have done lately in the Healthcare industry:

11/10/2011 Healthcare Social Communications Leadership Forum

07/13/2011 Social Communications & Healthcare 2011: Case Studies & Roundtables

06/09/2011 Healthcare & Life Sciences Social Communications Leadership Forum

03/17/2011 Healthcare Social Communications Leadership Forum

01/19/2011 Mobile Healthcare Communications: Case Studies and Roundtables

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Vincent Racaniello, PhD podcaster extraordinaire and a BioCrowd co-founder, has long contended that Twitter is an ideal medium to conduct scholarly research especially in the life sciences. Unfortunately, many scientists, who have yet to try Twitter, steadfastly disagree with Vincent. To that end, I received a message from the folks over at Onlinecollege.org alerting me to an article that they published entitled “15 Fascinating Academic Studies Done on Twitter."

While none of the studies mentioned in the post were conducted in the life sciences, they run the gamut from computer science to sociology, music and science education. Twitter, which is still in its formative stages, is clearly emerging as the social medium of choice to track real time events and to stay informed about current events. As the platform matures and more people sign up as users, it is likely that it will become a player for online scholarly research studies in the life sciences and an ideal medium for science education.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Tweeting!!!!!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Date:Thursday, January 26, 2012
Time: 8:00 a.m. - 1:00 p.m.
Place:The Graduate Center of The City University of NY; 365 5th Ave; NY, NY 10016 
Registration Fee: $195.00
Website: http://www.bdionline.com/mobilehealthcare2012.html

Mobile Healthcare Communications News
Five Reasons Why Physicians Need to Use Social Media, 12/12/11 HealthWorks Collective
Hospital sends heart failure patients home with smartphones. 12/15/11 Fierce Mobile Healthcare
Educate your hospital staff to protect against text-related mistakes, 12/19/11 Fierce Mobile Healthcare 

About the Event:
Consumers and professionals are increasingly using their mobile devices for healthcare information. They are also interacting with healthcare providers and colleagues on their mobile phones. This conference will demonstrate the best case studies of how major healthcare brands are connecting with consumers and professionals through mobile communications. 

Speakers and Roundtable Moderators:
Meighan Berberich, Vice President, Marketing, BlogTalkRadio
Lance Hill, CEO, Within3
Scott Hopkins, Executive Vice President, Anderson Direct Marketing
Monique Levy, Senior Director, Research, Manhattan Research
Dr. Katherine Malbon, Assistant Professor of Pediatrics, Division of Adolescent Medicine, Mount Sinai Hospital
Talya Miron-Shatz, PhD, Marketing Department, Wharton, University of Pennsylvania
Jenna Mons, Consumer Product Manager for LAP-BAND®, Allergan 
Mario Nacinovich, Jr., Editor-in-Chief, Journal of Communication in Healthcare; Managing Director, AXON
Xavier Petit, Shire 
John Vieira,Daiichi-Sankyo

Hotel Sponsor:Hotel 373 is the official hotel of BDI's events.Click here to receive a discounted rate.

Sponsors:
PR Newswire; Within3; Anderson Direct Marketing; BioCrowd ; Cinchcast; Journal of Communication in Healthcare; Manhattan Research; New York University; Pixels and Pills; Public Relations Society of America - New York Chapter; Society for Healthcare Strategy and Market Development

For event related questions and registration, please contact Maria Feola-Magro at mfeola@bdionline.com or 212.765.8043.
For sponsorship/speaking opportunities, including pricing, please click here or contact Jennifer Brous at jbrous@bdionline.com or 212-765-8358.

For additional information, including registration, please click here to visit the event website. Use promo code BC for a discounted rate of $175.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Increasingly, healthcare professionals, patients and consumers are turning to and using their mobile devices for healthcare information. Further, development of mobile software platforms and associated are allowing patients to more regularly directly communicate with their physicians. To help sort out the growing complexity of the mobile healthcare communications industry, the Business Development Institute (BDI) entitled “Mobile Healthcare Communications 2012:Case Studies and Roundtables” will be held on Thursday, January 26, 2012 from 8:00 AM to 1:00 PM at The Graduate Center of the City University of NY (365 5^th Ave, NY, NY 10016).

Registration fee for the event is $195 per attendee. BioJobBlog readers who wish to attend should use promo code BC for a discounted rate of $175.

Speakers and roundtable moderators include:

1. Lance Hill, CEO, Within3
2. Scott Hopkins, Executive Vice President, Anderson Direct Marketing
3. Dr. Katherine Malbon, Assistant Professor of Pediatrics, Division of Adolescent Medicine, Mount Sinai Hospital
4. Talya Miron-Shatz, PhD, Marketing Department, Wharton, University of Pennsylvania 
5. Jenna Mons, Consumer Product Manager for LAP-BAND®, Allergan 
6. John Vieira, Daiichi-Sankyo

Event sponsors include:

BioCrowd, PR Newswire; Within3 ; Anderson Direct Marketing; Cinchcast; Journal of Communication in Healthcare; Manhattan Research; New York University; Society for Healthcare Strategy and Market Development; Pixels & Pills

For event related questions and registration, please contact Maria Feola-Magro at mfeola@bdionline.com or 212.765.8043.

For sponsorship/speaking opportunities, including pricing, please click here or contact Jennifer Brous at jbrous@bdionline.com or 212-765-8358.

For additional information, including registration, please click here to visit the event website.

See you at the conference!

Until next time....

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

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

The incomparable Mark Senak, author of the EyeonFDA blog and social media enthusiast, offers a gift this holiday season to those of you track social media use by life sciences companies. Mark has assiduously compiled a list of the life sciences companies that use social media and their platforms of choice.

It is a comprehensive list and must have for all of you pharma social media junkies out there!

Happy Holidays!

Until next time...

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

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

A study conducted in November 2011 by Cegedim Strategic Data, a market research and promotional audit firm analyzed the world’s top 100 pharmaceutical companies expenditure on traditional promotional (marketing spends) and then compared that spending with their presence on Facebook and Twitter.

Not surprisingly, Pfizer, Novartis and Merck (the world’s largest big pharma companies) finished in the top three for traditional promotional spending. However, their use of social media i.e. Twitter and Facebook varied widely. For example, Pfizer—the top promotional spender—was first in its number of Twitter followers and third in the number of likes on Facebook. On the other hand, second ranked Novartis was fifth in the number of Twitter followers and in seventeenth position for likes on Facebook. Finally, third ranked Merck was fifteenth in the number of Twitter followers (third for the number of tweets) and in the tenth position for the number of likes on Facebook (but has more pages than any of its Facebook competitors).

Other notable companies included:

• Johnson &Johnson, eleventh in promotional spending and number two on the number of Facebook likes
• Roche, number fifteen on the promotional spending list was ranked number two for the number of Twitter followers
• Proctor and Gamble which ranked a distant 54^th in promotional spending was number four on the Twitter follower list

What does this all mean? A whole lot of nothing because nobody can determine what effects the use of social media has on the bottom line for most pharmaceutical companies. Unlike other industries, where social media can be used to sell products, it cannot be used for direct promotional purposes in the life sciences industry. While most people will tell you this is because of the lack of guidance by FDA on the use of social media, the bottom line is that social media will never be allowed for direct-to-consumer advertising in the pharmaceutical industry. That said, pharma and biotech will have to find other uses for social media including clinical trial recruitment and retention, adverse event reporting, employee recruitment and retention and education and outreach.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Tweeting (and Liking)

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Mark Senak, author of the EyeonFDA blog and a life sciences/healthcare social media enthusiast, wrote a fantastic piece yesterday that provides cogent ideas and insights into the need for FDA to expeditiously craft guidance on the use of social media in the pharmaceutical and healthcare industries.

Here are the facts. First, according to the Pew Internet and American Life Project, social media has fundamentally changed the way in which we interact with one another and ushered in a new era of communication. Unlike the old, so-called “broadcast communication method”—information is continuously streamed from a static source, websites, television, radio etc, to perspective customers and stakeholders—the new paradigm requires that communications must be personal, portable and participatory for effective messaging. Second, the primary source of information sought by most persons who use the Internet is healthcare and medical information. While much of the content is accurate, some is not; which may put persons seeking medical information at great risk. In other words, social media is not just about marketing and medical education; it is also about preserving public health.

The agency has historically been unable to issue guidance on new forms of communication. For example, FDA held its first public meeting in 1996 on Internet use by life sciences and healthcare companies. Sadly, the agency has yet to issue any official guidance on this topic. In late 2009, FDA held another public meeting and promised that draft guidance on the internet and social media would be forthcoming by the end of 2010. Unfortunately the guidance did not materialize in 2010 and it has been delayed twice in 2011. Recently, the agency publicly reaffirmed its commitment to issuing the guidance but without a specific timetable for its release. Consequently, it is anyone’s guess when or if the guidance will be released.

Unlike many, I do not believe that FDA guidance on the Internet and social media is absolutely necessary. However, I will admit that issuance of said guidance will provide drug and healthcare companies with some of the assurances that they need in order to actively use social media to engage patients, physicians and other stakeholders. For this reason alone, FDA ought to issue the guidance (which is never perfect and always a work in progress) and end the social media stalemate that currently exists. Failure to do so may have serious consequences on the public health of many Americans.

Hat tip to Mark!

Until next time...

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

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

About two years, I posted an opinion piece on BioJobBlog which argued that pharma’s reluctance to engage in social media because of fears of being swamped with adverse events (AEs) reports was little more than a red herring.

In that piece I opined “what is really at stake, is the systemic changes that would be required to transform a historically, opaque and unresponsive industry into a transparent, accountable and responsive one that would be required if it embraces social media as an integral part of its business model.” Nevertheless, two years later, there is still no FDA guidance on the use of social media in the pharmaceutical industry and while some companies have warmed up to the concept, it has not been wholly embraced by most companies.

However, there is new data that may put the “fear of being swamped by AEs reporting” argument to rest. The Pharmalot Blog reported today that a new study conducted by Visible Technologies, a social media monitoring and software firm, showed that only 0.3 percent of more than 257,000 posts about 224 different products —33 antacid over-the-counter meds, 38 over-the-counter decongestants, 10 prescription statins and 143 prescription drugs used to treat high blood pressure—mentioned an AE. For a more detailed analysis of the study please click here.

According to the Pharmalot post the study was conducted over a recent 30-day period and posts were collected from millions of social media sources including “blogs; forums; message boards; message groups; social networks, notably Facebook and LinkedIn; Twitter; regular news sites; specialized health sites, such a WebMD; and video and photo sites, such as YouTube and Flickr.” The study’s focus on statins, blood pressure medications, over-the-counter decongestants and antacids was intentional because tens of millions of persons use these products and therefore, would be more likely to comment on them at social media sites. The bottom line: the use of social media by pharma companies will not overwhelm their existing AE reporting networks nor will it require that more persons be hired. In fact, as I argued in my previous post, using social media for AE report may actually help companies better managed approved and marketed drugs as part of their FDA-required post marketing drug surveillance programs. 

At this point, I am at a loss as to why pharma has not yet embraced social media and leveraged it to their advantage like other industries. I suspect that most companies will not act until FDA issues the social media guidance it has been promising for the past two years. Sadly, it is anyone’s guess when the agency will finally issue the guidance—it has already been delayed several times over the past two years!

Until next time...

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

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Blogs first began appearing on the web about 10 years ago and most experts agree that they ignited the social media revolution. While blogs are the oldest form of social media, many pharma companies are reluctant to contribute to the content of the blogosphere. This is mainly because of perceived regulatory and legal issue and consequences. Nevertheless, a few intrepid big pharma companies have taken the social media plunge and currently maintain blogs with various formats and content.

From time to time, Mark Senak, author of the outstanding EyeonFDA blog, likes to check up on pharma to see how their social media experiments are going. In a post today, entitled “A Profile on Blogging By Pharma and FDA” he provides an update on pharma bloggers who he thinks are making a contribution to the life sciences community. The following is Mark’s assessment:

Johnson & Johnson–With JNJBTW, J&J has been blogging longer than any other pharma company with an archive going back to June 2007.  JNJBTW provides works to forge relationships with a broad spectrum of healthcare consumers by providing insights and resources for a variety of treatment related issues and profiles of company activities.  The blog haws multiple authors and accepts comments, though reviews them before posting according to the comments policy.  The blog has its own domain.

GSK–The More Than Medicine blog goes back to January 2009 and uses multiple authors to cover a wide span of subject matter that includes corporate social responsibility topics, chronic diseases, and current events. According to its comments policy, the blog allows for moderated comments. Entries can vary in terms of timing; with all three entries for October appearing on the same day.

AstraZeneca–Like JNJBTW and More Than Medicine, the AZHealthConnections blog takes a generalist approach by providing information on a broad spectrum of subject matter – some disease or condition specific in the areas of cancer and diabetes – but also including a public policy and general healthcare information. Residing in its own domain, the earliest archive is in October 2009 and the blog permits moderated comments according to its comments policy.

Lilly–The blog LillyPad is a more recent entry to the blogosphere begin in third quarter 2010, though no archive link is available on the landing page. LillyPad was started with a twitter handle as well of the same name, and more recently joined by a LillyPad YouTube channel called the Lilly Health Channel. The posting on the blog have frequent postings related to public policy and advocacy issues, though there is sometimes a posting on social responsibility or what it is like to work at the company. However, the focus on advocacy and policy issues (supporting innovation) seems to drive this effort in a very specific direction – being less generalist than other approaches. The comments policy is at the end of a post and states that comments are filtered – or moderated – by the company before posting.

Sanofi US–Here a company has taken a much more specific approach with a blog called Discuss Diabetes. The archive goes back to January 2011 and is therefore the newest entry and has the distinction on being the only disease/condition-specific target audience.  The blog, with its own domain, accepts and moderates comments. The focus is to provide information and resources regarding diabetes and resources for those who have it or are care partners, including such assets as its own mobile app for diabetics – Go Meals.

Pfizer–The Think Science Now blog on the Pfizer site has multiple authors who write to translate the science of medical research, though it lacks some of the traditional characteristics of a blog, such as an archive or commentary policy that was readily apparent. However, it is exemplary of the effort to aim at a specific audience of people rather than go broadly to the consuming public.

FDA–The FDA Transparency Blog first posted in November 2008 and was originally set to run for six months.  The purpose is to provide insight into how and why the agency comes to some of its decisions.  It does not have its own domain but is contained in the labyrinth of the FDA’s website.  The blog allows for moderated comments according to its comments policy, though I have not found that to necessarily be the case.

As you can see, there are not many pharma companies that maintain corporate blogs. Perhaps this may change after FDA releases it guidance on the use of social media in the life sciences industry. That said, it is anybody’s guess as to when that guidance will be issued; it already has been two years and there is no guidance yet!

Until next time...

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

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

I just returned from the AAPS meeting in Washington, DC and I was very surprised to learn that many graduate students and postdocs have heard of Twitter but don’t know exactly what it is or how to use it! Because of this, I decided to write a post that offered a step-by-step approach for using Twitter as a job search tool for life scientists who may be looking for jobs. However, much to my delight, I found a recent post on the Secret of the Job Hunt website that provides a great “how to” guide on Twitter use for jobseekers. 

The post entitled How to Use Twitter to Find a Job” was written by Erin Kennedy, CPRW, CERW a certified career counselor, resume writer and blogger is a great introduction to using Twitter and she provides insightful tips on how to maximize Twitter’s potential as a job searching tool.

How to Use Twitter to Find a Job

by Erin Kennedy, CPRW, CERW 

For any newbies to social networking, it might seem unusual to use a site such as Twitter to find a job. However, many people can find the right contacts on Twitter to help them to find a job–but it can be a little complicated in 140 characters or less? When using Twitter as a job search tool, it is best to keep content as neutral and professional as possible. Remember, as with anything you write and post online, once you “tweet” it’s out there FOREVER.

The first thing to do when starting up a Twitter account is to choose your user name wisely and word your 160-character bio in such a way that it becomes more searchable, or Google-friendly. Your bio should share a little bit about your career so that when other people look up that keyword, you can gain more traffic to your profile. An avatar will also make your profile more appealing. Choose a professional portrait or a simple picture in which you’re facing the camera and you are not accompanied by anyone else.

A basic rule of thumb when it comes to using Twitter as a job-search tool is to keep content favorable to anyone who might stumble across it – your tweets should balance your work and personal life. If you are looking for a job, you can tweet about the types of jobs in which you are interested. Also, you can tweet about your hobbies or interests so that employers get an idea of what you are like outside of work.

In that same vein, keep in mind that there are many recruiters who actually look to Twitter for new hires because it gives them something of a real-world perspective of what that person is like. In an extremely competitive economy, where plenty of people are qualified for the same job, many companies look at an applicant’s personality to see whether they would be a good fit in the company’s culture. In this case, it helps to follow these recruiters for the companies in which you are interested.

On a similar note, you can connect with these recruiters and industry leaders and show them your interest in their tweets. You can either “retweet” to forward their tweets along or you can address them directly by putting the @ symbol before their user name. By keeping in touch with these people, you will have access to the latest information in your industry. Therefore, when you are called in for a job interview, you will have that extra edge over other candidates by speaking confidently about your knowledge of their field.

Like any real-world networking situation, a Twitter presence cannot be expected to build overnight. It takes time and patience; however, by connecting with the right people, you might very well find your way to your dream career. The key to a successful Twitter profile is keeping it professional with a glimpse of your personality, hobbies and interests outside of work as well.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Tweeting!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

While LinkedIn is not considered by many to be a “true” social networking site (some consider it to be little more than a place to post an electronic resume), it is increasingly becoming the place to go to look for or find a job. Most recruiters and many hiring managers used LinkedIn to source qualified candidates for job open at their organizations. That said a well-thought-out and carefully written LinkedIn profile can make the difference between employment or not.

To that end, I came across a great article entitled “Five Minutes to Optimize Your LinkedIn Profile”. Its author, Ian Levine, provide some excellent advice and tips about how to craft a LinkedIn profile so that you will be found by recruiters and prospective hiring managers. Not surprisingly, the key to success is peppering your profile with keywords that are contained in standard job ads in your industry. According to Levine, LinkedIn appears to scan only four categories: Professional Headline, Titles, Specialties and Industries. LinkedIn scans these categories for frequency of the keywords selected.

One way that Levine recommends to assess whether or not your profile is a good one is to enter specific keywords that are consistent with the type of job(s) that you are interested in landing. If your profile comes up at the top (or close to it) of these types of searches than your profile is a good one. A failure to appear in the search results suggests that your profile may need some additional work to land a job!

Until next time...

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

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Despite the initial pushback against social media by many pharma and biotech companies it appears that Twitter is emerging as the medium of choice for the life sciences industry. The main reasons for this trend are the 140 character world limit and the real time nature of Twitter. Unlike Facebook pages and blogs, where visitor’s comments (of any length) remain for indefinite periods of time, the information contained in tweets is minimal and their exposure time is second or minutes rather than days or months. These features allow pharma and biotech companies to more easily manage information flow and quickly implement damage control when necessary. 

Because of the growing importance of Twitter in life sciences circles, Mark Senak, the intrepid author of the EyeonFDA blog and a self-proclaimed social media enthusiast, compiled a list of well, useful pharmaceutical Twitter lists. Twitter users can subscribe to lists which are a compilation of tweets from persons who belong to the lists. For those of you who use LinkedIn, Twitter Lists are analogous to LinkedIn Groups.

Mark recommends the following lists to those who want to follow the pharmaceutical/healthcare industry

Healthcare Reporters 

Pharmaceutical Manufacturers 

Device  Manufacturers

Medical Journals

FDA Twitter Feeds.

Government Healthcare

Pharmaceutical and Biotech Jobs

To view these lists you must be a Twitter member!

Hat tip to Mark and to John Mack at the Pharma Marketing Blog for the Twitter image!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Tweeting!!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (2)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Created by: Online PhD

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Crowdsourcing—using the collective talent of the Internet to solve problems—has been increasingly used to solve problems and find solutions in the computer software and electronics industry. Over the past few years, several forward-thinking life scientists had proposed the idea that crowdsourcing could possibly be used to solve the molecular structure of proteins that could be used as drug targets. To bring this possibility to reality, in 2008 a team of scientists at the University of Washington created an online, interactive, protein-folding game call Foldit that showcased the principle and properties of protein biochemistry. The thought was that Foldit and its worldwide cadre of users could be used to solve the molecular structure of certain proteins. Since 2008, over 100,000 have downloaded Foldit software and turned into a large, worldwide, multiplayer competition.

Earlier this week a group of scientists reported in the journal Nature Structure & Molecular Biology that Foldit users helped them to determine the molecular structure of a simian HIV protease that had baffled scientists for 15 years. The actual three dimensional structure of the protein that was predicted by Foldit was confirmed by X-ray crystallography. According to the paper’s authors (that included the Foldit players who helped solve the protein’s structure),

“Although much attention has recently been given to the potential of crowdsourcing and game playing, this is the first instance that we are aware of in which online gamers solved a longstanding scientific problem. These results indicate the potential for integrating video games into the real-world scientific process: the ingenuity of game players is a formidable force that, if properly directed, can be used to solve a wide range of scientific problems.”

Crowdsourcing is a new concept that is beginning to be embraced by the life sciences community including academics as well as industrial scientists. To learn more about crowdsourcing and its use in drug discovery and design, please read an article that I wrote for LifeScienceLeader this past July.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Gaming!!!!!!!!! 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Over two years ago at the beginning of the social media/pharma debate, I proposed that social media platforms like Twitter and Facebook would be great for adverse event reporting for drugs, biologics and medical devices. At the time, the suggestion was largely ignored and relegated to the category of “unlikely to happen anytime in my lifetime.” 

Imagine my delight after reading a post on today’s Pharmalot Blog which suggested that the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA)—the UK equivalent of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)—is considering whether to allow the public to use Twitter and Facebook to report side effects and adverse events.

According to the Pharmalot post:

"The MHRA is now “actively working on introducing other ways of reporting to make it easier and encourage more reporting,” Mick Foy, the MHRA group manager for vigilance and risk management of medicines, tells GP. “Applications for smartphones, improved web reporting forms and the use of social media such as Twitter and Facebook are being carefully considered as potential routes for reporting.”

While the MHRA is considering the use of social media, it is not clear that the agency will ultimately adopt Twitter, Facebook or other mobile applications for adverse event reporting. Like in the US, possible adverse reported in the UK must meet several criteria before they are verified and considered to be reportable adverse events. Despite potential problems and pitfalls, the fact that the MHRA is even considering social media as a means to improve adverse event reporting is laudable; considering the fact that FDA has yet to provide guidance on the use of social media in the US life sciences industry. Many companies, social media advocates and mobile app developers have been waiting for the said guidance for almost two years now.

Like it or not, social media is now part of the social fabric of today’s world. Rather than fighting its implementation, life sciences companies would use their considerable creative talent to figure out how to integrate and leverage social media (in non-promotional ways) to their benefit.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Tweeting and Following!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

As a blogger and an occasional Twitter user (believe me I would tweet more if I didn’t have to work for a living), I have often wondered how much of an impact that the links I post have on readers and followers. While there is little doubt that the posted links persist into perpetuity, it was not clear how long people continued to click or follow the links after they were posted. That is; until now!

According to new research by Bit.ly, the URL shortening service, most links shared online don’t live very long. The longevity of different links was determined by calculating the “half-life” (the point at which a link received half of its total online clicks) of links posted on Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, e-mail or chat clients.  

After analyzing 1,000 popular links on Bit.ly, it was determined that the average half-life of a link on Twitter was 2.8 hours. Links posted to Facebook lasted slightly longer at 3.2 whereas the longevity for e-mail and chat links was 3.4 hours. Interestingly, the average half-life of YouTube links was 7.4 hours and that of news-related links was a mealy five minutes! 

The conclusion—people spend way too much time watching videos on YouTube and pay little attention to current events. Duh, like I didn’t already know that!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Link Following.....

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Mark Senak, author of the outstanding EyeonFDA blog, tweeted today, that Eli Lilly & Co had launched a YouTube Channel. According to a post on the company’s blog Lilly Pad, its new channel dubbed the “Lilly Health Channel” will “videos on health and wellness, employee and community outreach efforts, health innovation, Lilly programs and other non-product-branded initiatives.”

While the announcement of a launch of another pharma-sponsored YouTube channel is no longer new or novel, Eli Lilly has been trying to transform itself into a modern, social media and crowdsourcing-focused pharmaceutical company. For example, Lilly is one of only a handful of big pharma companies that sponsors its own corporate blog. Moreover, the company is a leader in using so-called crowdsourcing to discover and develop potential new drugs. It has spun off at least two ventures that utilize a crowdsourcing approach to new drug discovery. Finally, unlike most other big pharma CEOs, its chief executive John Lechleiter has been outspoken about the lack of innovation and available workforce talent in the US life sciences industry. 

Is Lilly truly the pharmaceutical company of the future? That remains to be seen! 

Until next time... 

Good Luck and Good Viewing!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Forget about Facebook. The hottest social media platform on the Internet these days is Twitter the real time, 140 character microblogging service. While most people have heard of Twitter, there are still many folks out there who don't know what it is or how to use it. Interestingly, a growing number of hiring managers and job seekers are turning to Twitter to search for fresh talent or learn about new job opportunities.

Using Twitter is very easy but potential users may be reluctant to use it simply because it is new and requires a little bit of practice.  To that end, my good friend the Recruiting Animal (@animal), a long time, professional recruiter and BlogTalk Radio personality who hosts the wildly popular the Recruiting Animal Show, did an excellent  television interview with ABC News describing how to use Twitter to find jobs.

For those of you who don't know Animal he is a very colorful and bombastic personality. However, despite his theatrics, he is a very knowledgeable and insightful. So, listen closely to what he has to say in his video.

Until next time

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting (and Tweeting too)!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

For the past few years, I along with many others have advocated the use of social media platforms (mainly Facebook, Twitter and YouTube) by life sciences companies. Despite a very positive beginning by companies like Novo Nordisk, Johnson and Johnson and others, the implementation of social media in the life sciences industry has been stymied by a lack of regulatory guidance by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and legal and commercialization concerns. While many believe that FDA guidance on the topic will be the panacea that they were waiting for, I personally don’t believe that it will make one bit of difference. That said, Steve Woodruff, the author of the IMPACTIVITI Blog, provides one of the best analyses that I have encountered that explains why social media and pharma don’t work well.

In a post entitled “Time to Give Up on Pharma and Social Media,” Steve cogently provides four compelling reasons why it will be difficult for pharma to ever embrace social media for commercial purposes. They include 1) the lack of regulatory guidance; 2) pharma does not communicate or interact in real time; 3) personnel turnover, short term thinking, lack of innovation and too much focus on quarterly profits; and 4) pharma’s addiction to centralized, one-way controlled communications. His bottom line:

“Public, interactive, real-time social media platforms and commercial pharma communications simply don’t mesh well” 

While I agree with Steve that social media may not be ideal for commercial purposes in the prescription life sciences industry, it may be perfectly well suited for pharmacovigilance and adverse event reporting, clinical trial recruitment and management, education, community outreach and employee recruitment and retention. These are not new ideas. But, because they cost money to implement and don’t contribute the most company’s revenue-driven bottom lines, life sciences companies have not actively explored or embraced them for these purposes. 

Whether big pharma and biotech companies like it or not, social media is here to stay. And, if these companies fail to act soon, they eventually will begin to lose their competitive edges and perhaps more importantly, market share. 

Until next time.. 

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

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

About a year ago, I suggested that real time social media platforms like Twitter could be invaluable tools for adverse event (AE) reporting and related pharmacovigilance activities. However the mere mentioned of the dreaded AE causes many marketing, legal and regulatory affairs professionals at major pharmaceutical companies to break out into a cold sweat. 

As Mark Senak aptly pointed out in a recent post on his blog EyeonFDA,

“...the reporting of adverse events using social media has long been the bogeyman feared by the legal and regulatory departments of drug manufacturers in the US.”

Further, Mark rightly asserts:

“....the adverse event issue may have proven a red herring.  That is perhaps evidenced by the now large number of Twitter feeds that are active representing pharmaceutical manufacturing companies and even their products; the growing, though not as quickly and not with as much success, presence of YouTube channels; the large number of Facebook pages and even an uptick in the number of corporate sponsored blogs – now at five by my count.  If the adverse event reporting issue really were an issue, this presence would be shrinking, not growing.”

So, what is the “real reason” why drug manufacturers refuse to embrace social media like almost every other industry that I can think of? True, FDA has not yet issued its long awaited guidance on the use of social and digital media in the life science industry. But, the lack of guidance has not prevented pharma and biotech companies from innovating in the past. I suspect that one of the reasons why many companies refuse to adopt social media is the requisite transparency and interactivity that are typically associated with its use. And, perhaps more importantly is the perceived loss of control over product messaging that companies with approved drugs on the market have enjoyed for the past 50 years or more.

Whatever the reasons are, I still contend that social media platforms are ideal tools for AE reporting and pharmacovigilance activities. Hopefully, drug makers will come to realize this with or without FDA guidance on the topic.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Tweeting!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

As social media popularity continues to increase, more and more hiring managers and employers are using it to vet prospective job candidates. A little over a year ago, it was estimated that roughly 30% of recruiters and hiring managers use social media to screen job applicants. Anecdotal evidence suggests that today, this percentage may have swelled to as much as 70 percent! 

Although LinkedIn is growing in popularity, Facebook is still, by far, the largest online social networking site. Unlike LinkedIn, which is billed as a “professional networking site,” Facebook remains a social networking site that is primarily used for recreational purposes or to stay in touch with family and friends. However, because of its gigantic size companies are increasingly relying on Facebook for promotional purposes and to recruit new employees.

Until recently, many persons with Facebook accounts paid little attention to the content that they posted to their profile pages. Unlike print and other traditional broadcast mediums, once something is posted to Facebook it is “in the ether” and it is exceedingly difficult to expunge or remove it. Consequently, an inappropriate image or damaging statement posted to a Facebook page will likely remain on the Internet into perpetuity— whether you want it to or not. And, in today’s fiercely competitive job market, employers are looking for any reason whatsoever not to hire a prospective new employee. Therefore, it is vitally important to understand the “dos” and “don’ts” of Facebook and other social networking sites to insure that their use does not interfere with or hinder a job candidate’s employability or future career development.

About a year, Erin Joyce of Yahoo Finance published a post about the impact of inappropriate Facebook use on career development. I have attempted to summarize her insights and tips in this post. To that end, this is what you SHOULD NOT do on Facebook

1. Post Inappropriate Pictures, Photos or Images

It is probably not a good idea for prospective employers or clients to see photos of you chugging a bottle of Jagermeister and obviously “hammered” or dressed up for a night out at a bar or club.

While you may think that your personal life is private, prospective employers may think otherwise especially if you voluntarily posted compromising or inappropriate photos of yourself to your Facebook page and they can find them via Google search. A willingness to post these types of images suggests that you may lack good judgment and not appropriately represent an organization or yourself in professional settings.

2. Complain About Your Current Boss or Job

Everyone complains about their job. However, it is one thing to verbally and privately rant and complain about your incompetent boss or lazy coworker but another to post it to a public forum for all to see! Posting these things to your Facebook page may help to reduce stress and make you feel better but it is probably not the wisest thing to do if you know your boss and co-workers have Facebook accounts or regularly chat with others who do.

3. Post Conflicting Professional Information

If your CV/resume indicates that you received your PhD degree from SUNY-Stonybrook but your Facebook page indicates that you matriculated from Columbia then at worst prospective employers may think that you are a liar or at best careless. Neither is good for jobseeker and discrepancies like these are sure to get your name off the short list for face-to-face job interviews.

4. Update Your Status with Ill-Advised Updates

If you are at work, it is probably not a good thing to update your Facebook status with “watching the NCAA Men’s Basketball Championship Game. Likewise, if you are employed it is not a good idea to update your status with “got hammered last night and decided to stay home form work today.” Statuses that imply that you are unreliable, deceitful, and anything that doesn't make you look as professional as you'd like, can seriously undermine your chances at keeping or landing a new job.

5. Allow Friends to Post to Your Wall or Tag You in Photos

Erin was dead on with this one. She said: 

“You can't control what your friends post to your profile (although you can remove it once you see it), nor what they post to their own profiles or to those of mutual friends. If a potential client or employer sees those Friday night pictures your friend has tagged you in where he is falling down drunk, it reflects poorly on you, even if the picture of you is completely innocent. It's unfortunate, but we do judge others by the company they keep, at least to some extent. Take a look at everything connected to your profile, and keep an eye out for anything you wouldn't want to show your mother.”

While Facebook can hinder or hurt employment opportunities, if you used correctly it can also help a jobseeker get hired. Therefore, if you are a jobseeker and already have a personal Facebook page, it is probably a good idea to set that page to private and only permit friends that you approve to view it. Once you have done this, create a second public profile for professional uses only. This page will function like an online resume and should only be populated with information that you would be comfortable showing or telling a prospective employer in face-to-face situations.

Like it or not, social media is here to stay and avoiding its use may signal to prospective employers that you are not technologically savvy or not particularly social: two vitally-important skill sets required by most employers.

For more ways to use Facebook as a job hunting tool check out this post!

Until next time...

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

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Mark Senak, author of the highly informative and well written Eye on FDA blog, reported today that a recent article that appeared on the American Medical News website suggests that the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) may be considering regulating mobile apps that contain medical or clinical components. While the agency has yet to officially publish guidance on the use of social media in the life sciences industry, it now appears that FDA may be turning its attention on the development of mobile apps; one of the fastest growing segments of the social media movement.

The reason why FDA is taking notice of mobile apps is because a handful of app developers have sought and received FDA clearance for their mobile apps that—because of clinical components —are considered to be “medical devices.” As many of you may know, medical devices which include band-aids, surgical instruments, heart monitors, cardiovascular stents and diagnostic kits, all must receive marketing approval by the agency before they can be sold in the US. Although the agency yet to craft any guidance for clinical/medical app development, it makes sense that FDA ought to evaluate and regulate these products to insure that they are medically-effective and safe. 

According to the American Medical News article, the first app developer to receive FDA market clearance was AirStrip Technologies in San Antonio, for its AirStrip OB application. The app, which was approved in 2009, allows physicians to monitor mother and newborn remotely during delivery. In February, the FDA granted clearance to MobiUS, an app developed by Mobisante, a medical device company in Redmond, Wash. The app permits viewing of medical images for diagnostic purposes. Mobile MIM, a remote diagnostic imaging tool developed by Cleveland-based MIM Software, was also granted market clearance that month. A number of pharmaceutical companies, most notably Pfizer, have been extremely active in the mobile clinical app development space.

The reason why it makes sense for FDA to regulate certain clinical/medical apps is because physicians will rely on them to make medical decisions. For example, the AirStrip OB mentioned above will ostensibly allow physicians to remotely monitor a mother and neonate during delivery. Consequently, the app, aka device, must be evaluated by the agency to determine whether or not it can be used safely and effectively by physicians during childbirth. In this case, the app is similar to a heart monitor that is used during childbirth. And, like all other medical devices, the heart monitor required FDA clearance to determine its safety and effectiveness, before it could be used in real-life childbirth situations. To that end, the agency has hinted that it will be much more proactive in monitoring this new class of devices.

I have no doubt that many pharmaceutical companies and medical devices manufacturers will not be pleased when they learn that the agency is going to “stick its nose” into mobile app development. Nevertheless, in my opinion, if a mobile app is going to be used in possible “life or death” situation, then it ought to be regulated by FDA—the agency that is legally responsible for regulating these types of products. That said, Eye on FDA’s Mark Senak raises a number of valid and insightful points about FDA and its possible role in mobile app development.

“Related to a possible guidance for apps, there are a lot of questions that need to be answered when considering its development – when is an app a medical app?  When does it require regulation?  Who will pay for the oversight – will there be App Developers User Fee Act (ADUFA?) and if so, what will that do to the price and to access.  Will insurance companies have to cover apps?  And what will the process for approval be – something like a 510(k)?”

Finally, I think that the app developers who proactively approached FDA for guidance abut the clinical apps that they were developing “got it right.” This will get the agency “thinking” about clinical/mobile apps and how they ought to be approved and regulated in the future. In turn, this will provide future app developers with a clear regulatory framework that will guide the development of cost effective, safe and efficacious mobile clinical apps.

Until next time...

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

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

While big pharma continues to struggle with the use of social media to promote its products, direct-to-consumer advertising (DTC), the method of choice for American pharmaceutical advertising is alive, well and robust. Therefore, it should come as no surprise that big pharma is reallocating some its traditional DTC advertising dollars to deliver drug ads to mobile devices which are growing in popularity. 

According to a recent article posted on PharmaLive, drug companies are mainly using mobile devices —in addition to delivering ads—to “help educate patients and motivate them to seek, accept, and adhere to therapy.” In other words, to more effectively promote their products to improve sales and corporate profits. Regardless of the motive, medical communication agencies have recognized the trend and have responded by launching mobile divisions and initiatives at their firms. Some agencies are now generating close to 50% of their revenues from mobile initiatives and campaigns. Further, many pharmaceutical companies have finally realized that corporate websites can be more than simple placeholders on the Internet. To that end, the PharmaLive post notes that pharmaceutical brand websites are evolving into a robust resource structured to be easily searchable and maintained. Maybe a better understanding and use of social media is next up for drug makers.

Pfizer remains the leading spender and purveyor of DTC advertising despite a 15% overall decrease in 2010 as compared with 2009. PharmLive reports that the company allocated $903.8 million to brands such as Lipitor, Pristiq, Viagra, Chantix, and Lyrica. Of these brands, Pristiq saw the highest increase of DTC advertising in 2010, up 17% to $122.2 million compared to 2009.

As mobile media continues to grow, don’t be surprised if someone develops a TIVO-like fast forward app to skip all of the DTC ads on your iPhone or android devices.

Until next time..

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Science and medical conference season is in full swing and tens of thousands of persons are attending scientific and medical meeting all over the US. While social media is no longer a new “thing” only a few scientific and medical societies understand its power and ways in which it may be harnessed to improve the experiences of their members who attend their national meetings. 

At most of the scientific conferences that I attend (usually four to fiver per year), people still lug around and are tethered to printed program guides. Further there is no easily accessible electronic repository (aside from the conference website) or guide that conference attendees can use to optimize time management and see “everything” that they want to at the meeting. Unfortunately, most scientific and medical conferences are still being run the same way that they have been for the past 30 years despite improvements to internet access and bandwidth, the advent of social media and the recent explosion of mobile devices and apps.

Finally, and perhaps most egregiously, rather than publicly disseminating what is being reported at these meetings, conference attendees and the lay public must rely on carefully orchestrated press releases (chosen in advance by the organizing committees of the meetings) for information and late-breaking news from the events. This is so web 1.0 that it is almost laughable.

Until last week, I thought that I was the only person who felt this way about social media and medical and scientific congresses. Imagine my surprise when no fewer than three others social media enthusiasts including Mark Senak, author of the EyeonFDA blog, Brian Reid, author of the WCG Common Sense Blog and Sally Church, author of the Pharma Strategy Blog, last week authored posts on the topic! It is always refreshing to find like-minded individuals to confirm that you are not alone!

Unfortunately, many scientific and medical societies like to tightly control information flow, limit access to it and, not surprisingly, are quite suspicious of social media. This is because the use of social media decreases the ability of these societies and their journals to control their messaging and content dissemination. With this in mind, is it any wonder why American scientific and medical literacy is pretty much in the “toilet?”  While the lay public may not be able to understand peer-reviewed scientific and medical publications, they have grown accustomed to gathering information on Facebook, Twitter and most importantly blogs. Why not use these vehicles to better inform the public about scientific or medical breakthroughs that have been validated and generally regarded as authentic?

Like it or not, social media is here to stay. And if leveraged correctly, it can be an extremely effective educational tool. I think that it is time for scientific and medical societies to consider using social media at their annual meetings. A failure to do so may have negative consequences for future membership in these societies and also reduce their effectiveness as purveyors of timely and accurate scientific and medical information!

Until next time...

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

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

BioJobBlog and BioCrowd co-sponsoring the Business Development Institute and PR Newswire's Healthcare and LIfe Sciences Communications Leadership Forum that will be held on June 9, 2011 in San Diego CA

The forum is comprised of a group of senior marketing and communications executives from prominent biotechnology, pharmaceutical, hospital groups, medical device, and managed care companies. The forum focuses on how healthcare and life sciences brands achieve business objectives with social media and social technologies. The event consists of case study examples from well respected organizations in an intimate setting at AMN Healthcare in San Diego, CA.

• What are the best examples of how to connect with consumers and healthcare professionals through social approaches?
• What are the best case studies of how healthcare brands create and execute content strategies and content based marketing?
• How do you integrate social with your traditional customer service and marketing platforms?
• How are leading brands organizing themselves to best deliver results across the enterprise?
• How have others overcome the compliance and legal challenges with social communications?
• How do you plan, manage, integrate, and leverage data from social, online, and offline programs?
• How are mobile and location-based technologies being applied in healthcare?
• What are the tools, technologies, and best practices for monitoring and measuring social communications?

Speakers:

For additional information, including registration, please click here to visit the event website.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

I previously posted a piece about the growing need to manage the personal information about oneself on the Web. The amount of information that persons willingly (in many cases) provide about themselves without thinking is enormous. Therefore, it should come as no surprise that marketers, prospective employers, suitors and even criminals and stalkers can find information and use it whether or not the information correct or not. Unfortunately, the bad news is that once digital information makes it way onto the web, it is likely to remain there into perpetuity and in some cases can never be removed! According to an article in today’s NY Times:

“Snoops who take the time to troll further online may also find in blog posts or Facebook comments evidence of your political views, health challenges, office tribulations and party indiscretions, any of which could hurt your chances of admission to school, getting or keeping a job or landing a date. Many privacy experts worry that companies will use this data against users, perhaps to deny insurance coverage or assign a higher interest rate on a loan.”

Unfortunately, many web users are beginning to realize—the hard way—that providing personal information while building a Facebook, LinkedIn or Twitter profile may not have been such a great idea after all. To that end, reputation management or the ability to remove incorrect or unflattering information from the web has been transformed into a business opportunity for a number of new companies. In the past, the best way to determine the amount of personal information about a person on the web was to key a person’s name into a search engines like Google, Yahoo or Bing.

For those of you who regularly “search yourselves” (it is a very smart thing to do), you know that it takes an inordinate amount of  time to follow each and every one of the links that come up on search results pages. Because of this, many people simply search the first two or three pages of each search. The bad news is that some of the most “juicy tidbits” about a person often do not appear on the first few search pages (mainly because they are not optimized for search) Not to worry, Spokeo.com—a personal information aggregation site that bills itself as “Not your grandma’s white pages”—can quickly find a person’s vital information including age, home value, marital status, phone number, photos and even a home address. 

After entering my name into the Spokeo’s search box (located on the company’s homepage) I pressed enter and viola the location of four persons who shared my name were retrieved. I selected the appropriate person (the one who lives in New Jersey), and as billed, the search results included my name, my address, home phone, the estimated value of my home and even my wife’s first name (she has a different last name)!  The dat were presented in a convenient Web 2.0-lkie profile box. The search that I conducted on me was free. However, for an additional fee I can get a full report from Spokeo that includes additional information about my age, e-mail address, income, hobbies, photos, videos, and even my lifestyle (?). 

While this is pretty shocking and creepy (especially if you don’t want people to find you), the unfortunate thing is that most of the information that the Spokeo search found was likely willingly provided by me while registering or signing up for things at various shopping and social media websites. To wit, there is a lot of information out there on the web about many unsuspecting persons and finding it can be easily accomplished using tools like Spokeo.

In my previous post, I mentioned Reputation.com, a start-up that offers a paid service to clients who want to expunge inaccurate or damaging information about them from the web. Like Reputation .com Abine offers a personal service  called Delete Me but takes the personal data search and privacy paradigm a step further. Abine charges $99 a year for quarterly reports detailing the information available about you online. Further, the company has developed a suite of  personal privacy software designed to “allow regular people to regain control over their personal information while continuing to browse, interact and shop online.”

Its main software product is a web browser add-on called Privacy Suite that according to a blurb on the Abine website “combines disparate privacy tools into a comprehensive privacy system. By putting all the controls in one place, the Abine plug-in makes it easier to control the amount of personal information being collected and stored about you online. Some features include:

• Stopping tracking by hundreds of advertising networks and websites
• Manage all cookies (regular & Flash) and trackers in one place.
• Easily create distinct online accounts for different uses
• Pre-fill registration forms with limited subsets of information
• Shield your real info with disposable emails and phone numbers

So, if you don’t have the time or cannot afford the $400 per year to use Abine’s Delete Me service or its Privacy Suite, you can always try to manage your online reputation by yourself by routinely Googling yourself and manually removing all inappropriate or compromising information about you. Sometimes, you may have to negotiate (or pay) bloggers or data brokers—companies that buys data from other companies and then sells it to companies that collect it— to remove a post or a name from people database sites like 123people.com, MyLife.com, Spokeo, US Search, WhitePages and Peoplefinder.com. If a blogger or data broker refuses to comply with a removal request, one privacy consultant suggests “creating more good content about yourself, like starting a LinkedIn profile and a personal blog, to push down the bad to the third or fourth search results screen where few people bother to look. If the content is defamatory — both false and damaging — or otherwise illegal, hire a lawyer.”

Typically deleted information should drop out of search engine sites with a few weeks. If it doesn’t, you can request for it to be removed. For example, Google offers instructions to accomplish this, but Goggle rarely removed items or content that is not illegal unless the owner of the website where the material is published allows it. Also, despite your best efforts, it may not be possible, in some cases to completely expunge all offensive or damaging online information from the web; you will just have to learn to live with it! Having said that, it may be a good idea to think twice before your provide too much personal information while entering a contest to win a free iPad or free service, joining multiple online shopping site or creating a profile on a social networking site unless the company’s privacy policy is easy to read and understand. 

While most smaller online networking sites like BioCrowd will not sell or share a members personal information to online data brokers or marketing companies, some of the larger ones will allow third parties to access their databases for the right price!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting (be careful out there)

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

For the past few years, I have been warning jobseekers to be careful about what they post to Facebook, Twitter and other social media platforms. This is because many professional recruiters and employers routinely scour social media sites and conduct Google searches on job applicants and to vet prospective new hires. There is nothing more likely to kill a job offer than a photo of a drunken job candidate holding a bottle of Jagermeister or one that depicts a candidate in lingerie or a compromising sexual position. Unfortunately, information posted to the Web has a tendency to exist into perpetuity whether you want it to or not! In other words, once it is published it may not be possible to remove or retrieve the offending material.

While the inability to erase one’s digital past was once mainly a problem of younger and college age persons, the growing use of social media by older individuals has catapulted the problem into the mainstream. Many older adults and celebrities involved in divorces, lawsuits and sensitive business transactions are increasingly finding it difficult to escape their digital past unscathed.

It is possible for those who are haunted by unflattering tags in Facebook photos or ill-advised tweets to “clean up” their reputations themselves. However, this can be an extremely labor intensive and anxiety ridden undertaking, which in many cases —due to the sheer volume of Facebook updates, tweets, Flickr photos and blog posts—might not be successful. This has resulted in the creation of a new type of Web specialists known as reputation managers who work at companies like Reputation.com and Metal Rabbit Media. These companies offer their clients’ services designed to expunge negative blog posts, tweets and photos, bury unfavorable Google search results and monitor clients’ “virtual image.”

Unlike individual users who manually try to remove incriminating information by themselves, reputation management companies actually write code or develop algorithms to expunge or reduce the impact of potentially damaging material. Not surprisingly, these services are not free and they typically cost $120 to $600 per year for the “average person.” Celebrities, politicians and corporate executives are usually charged $5,000 to $10,000 per month (fame is expensive so be careful what you wish for).

Obviously, unfortunate digital fiascos can easily be averted if you stop and think about the content before you post it. This bit of advice is extremely important for those who are actively involved in a job search. To that end, I highly recommend that active jobseekers routinely Google themselves to get a “digital snapshot “of the information about them on the Web. However, if you determine that “genie is already out of the bottle” (and you can’t force it back in by yourself) then it may be time to call in the professionals!

For more information on digital reputation management please read the post “Erasing the Digital Past.”

Until next time..

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting (be careful out there)

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

There is no question that Twitter is the new social media tool of the moment. And, it should come as no surprise that scientists and other bioprofessionals have been slow to jump on the Twitter bandwagon. While the jury is still out on Twitter’s effectiveness as a research tool, there is a growing body of evident that suggests that it can be a valuable tool when conducting a job search. 

To that end, Miriam Salpeter, the owner of Keppie Careers wrote an incisive piece on leveraging Twitter to find a job or jumpstart your career. I excerpted relevant parts of the post that originally appeared as “Older Job Seeker: Want to Tweet Yourself to A New Job?”  While originally aimed at older employees, much of what is presented in the article is germane to life scientists of all ages who are seeking new job opportunities! 

Want to Tweet Yourself to A New Job?”

by Miriam Salpeter

Would you believe that you can tweet yourself to a job opportunity 140 characters at a time? It’s been done! Statistics show that job search networking is much more effective when you make “loose” connections – touching base with people beyond your immediate circle whose networks and contacts are much different from your own. With over 200 million users, Twitter offers an unparalleled opportunity to create an extended network.

Not convinced that Twitter is actually a high-powered job search tool? Read on to learn how Twitter can uniquely position you for job-hunting success!

What Can Twitter Do For You?

1. Afford access to other professionals in your field. When you follow industry leaders, you’ll know who spends time with them, what conferences they attend (and what they think of the speakers!), what they’re reading and what is on their minds. This is great information to leverage for your search.

2. Provide exposure and credibility as well as personal and professional relationships when you connect to others in your industry.

3. Offer you a venue to demonstrate your expertise and share information in quick, pithy bursts of wisdom. This is perfect if you don’t have the time or energy to create a blog.

Unique Aspects of Twitter

1. It is casual and immediate and a great place to “meet” informally.

2. You’ll find an array of people on Twitter, including CEOs, top-level executives, hiring managers, recruiters and everyone in-between! It’s one-stop shopping for your networking needs. You’ll be surprised to find that stars in your field (mentors) may follow you if you reach out to them!

3. Unlike Facebook, where it is kind of creepy if you start trying to “friend” people who are connected to your contacts, it is acceptable (and expected) to follow people on Twitter because another friend or colleague does.

4. It forces you to be brief. Coming up with your “Twit-Pitch” – what you have to offer in 140 characters or less – will help you clarify your value proposition. Remember: less is more!

What To Do First?

1. Brand yourself professionally. If you are planning to use Twitter for a job search, set up a designated profile and account. Choose a professional Twitter handle using your name or some combination of your name and profession that sounds good and is easy to remember. For example, JaneSmith or MarketingExpertJane.

2. Take time to create a professional profile that will attract your target market. If you don’t have a website, link to your LinkedIn profile.

3. Before you follow anyone, start posting some tweets! Don’t succumb to the temptation to share your lunch menu…Tweet about an article, an idea or share a link of professional interest to your targeted followers. Do this for a few days. It may seem strange to be tweeting when no one is following, but you may be surprised to gain an audience before you even try. Once you have a great profile and a set of interesting tweets, start following people in your industry. Aim high! Follow stars – some will follow you back.

4. Continue to build your network by using Twitter Search and Twitter’s Find People tool. Manually review profiles and use Twubble to help you find new people to follow. Use directories such as Twellow and TwitDir. Grow your network slowly – you don’t want to follow 1000 people and have only 30 following you. That makes you look spammy, not professional.

5. Give, give, give! Think about what you can do for others. Don’t blatantly self-promote. Instead, help promote others. “Retweet” (pass along information someone else shared, giving them credit) – you will earn followers and friends this way. Those who know (and like) you will become part of your network and will be willing to help you.

Sustain Your Twitter Network

1. Twitter doesn’t have to be very time-consuming, but if it’s going to be part of your job search strategy, make a point to keep up with it by sending out something useful every day.

2. Read what other people write and respond. Join conversations and start your own.

3. Don’t be afraid to send a message directly to a star in your field. Simply address your tweet to @their Twitter name, and they should receive it. (Be aware that Twitter isn’t 100% reliable, so feel free to try again if you don’t hear back or have reason to believe your message wasn’t delivered).

4. Use the direct message feature if you have a private or personal note. Remember that the recipient may respond publicly, though.

5. Feel free to tweet that you are looking for an opportunity. (See below for a success story!)

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Tweeting!!!!!!  (@biojobbblog)

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

The Pharmalot Blog today reported that FDA, for the second time in four months, has postponed plans to issue its widely anticipated guidance on social media. Guidance was initially expected last December. When FDA announced it wasn’t going to be able to make its original deadline, the guidance was rescheduled for release in the first quarter of 2011, which was presumably was to occur this month. At this point it is anyone’s guess as to when the long awaited guidance document(s) will be issued by the agency.

According to the Pharmalot post the guidance will address:

“responding to unsolicited requests; fulfilling regulatory requirements when using tools associated with space limitations; fulfilling post-marketing submission requirements; online communications for which manufacturers, packers, or distributors are accountable; use of links on the Internet and correcting misinformation…”

The agency further added:

“We are developing multiple draft guidances to address these topics to benefit industry and the public by ensuring that these draft guidances are meaningful and well thought out when they are issued.”

While many companies still contend that FDA’s guidance will be necessary for them to engage in social media, most have realized that if they wait for the agency’s guidance the social media craze may pass them by; possibly jeopardizing substantial financial opportunities afforded by social media in other industries. The notion that FDA’s guidance on social media will help pharma unravel the so-called social media conundrum is misguided and, in my humble opinion, wishful thinking. 

Companies who are familiar with working with FDA understand that guidance documents may offer some help to better understand certain regulations. But, it is generally up to a company with questions to directly solicit input from the agency rather than rely on an interpretation of a specific guidance recommendation (s). The goal of social media is to promote conversations and provide greater transparency surrounding both business and social interactions. Ironically, it appears the many of the companies that are most anxiously awaiting FDA’s social media guidance are the very ones that want to continue to develop products without involving the agency unless absolutely necessary. Go figure.....

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Tweeting*

*Although FDA has yet to issue social media for the life sciences industry it has a YouTube Channel, Facebook Page  and at least two twitter accounts (@FDA_Drug_Info and @FDArecalls)!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

The life sciences industry is all a-Twitter (sorry) about social media and its implications for future business opportunities. Nevertheless, despite the obvious “upside” of social media, as is always the case in the pharmaceutical industry, most companies don’t want to be the first to do anything innovative or novel (go figure).  

Obviously, there are many risks associated with being first in anything. But, the aversion to being first in the industry to “rock the boat” is more pronounced in the pharmaceutical industry than in most others. That said, companies like Novo Nordisk (the first successful promotional product Twitter campaign), Johnson and Johnson ( the first company to blog) and Boehringer Ingelheim (using Twitter for conversational purposes not just a corporate news feed) at various times, dared to go where no company has gone before with the social media experiment. And, despite the apprehension and almost palpable trepidation exhibited by these companies, no overt consequences have resulted from the bold moves made by these social media pioneers. It now appears that there is another new benchmark for companies involved in the pharmaceutical social media experiment; the first ever sponsored pharma Twitter Chat held by @AstraZenecaUS.

This event was first reported (as far as I can tell) by Mark Senak, the author of the informative EyeonFDA blog and one of the leading pharmaceutical social media watchdogs. The Twitter Chat (under the hash tag #rxsave) was held by @AstraZeneca to discuss with its followers ways in which patients can save money on prescription drugs. While I didn’t participate in this somewhat paradoxical chat —a prescription drug companies discussing ways in which patients may save money on their expensive prescription drugs? —it does demonstrate willingness on AstraZeneca’s part to interact with prospective customers in a meaningful way to help them overcome financial barriers to access to potentially life- altering or-saving prescription drugs!

Although there are still no regulatory guidelines governing the use of social media by life sciences companies, the willingness of @AstraZenecaUS to put itself on the line is very refreshing. In my opinion, it is an important first step to help to “humanize” pharmaceutical companies. Also, it demonstrates a willingness by a pharmaceutical company to provide help to persons who perhaps cannot afford or are struggling to gain access to the prescription drugs that they need!

Hat tip and kudos to @AstraZenecaUS!

Until next time...

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

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

ComScore, a company that tracks Internet traffic recently determined that the number of visitors to Web-based e-mail sites, like Gmail, Yahoo mail and others, declined roughly 5.9 per cent from November 2009 to November 2010. In November, 2009 160 million users used web-based e-mail platforms whereas only 153 million used those services. 

According to comScore, the decline represents the growing use of mobile e-mail devices like Blackberry and the iPhone which don’t require their users to log on to the Web to view messages. However, while the number of people who use mobile devices to check e-mail daily rose to 40 per cent, it isn’t clear whether or not the conclusions drawn by comScore are accurate. For example, I use Yahoo mail daily to check e-mail messages on my iPhone. Moreover, although Web-based e-mail use by persons aged 12 to 17 years dropped 24 percent over the past year, the number of users aged 55 years and older continues to rise. Finally, while my children aged 17, 15 and 12 prefer text and chat to e-mail they all still use web-based e-mail for formal communications with their teachers and older persons. I suspect that this is not very surprising to many BioJobBlog readers because the number of baby boomers (old fogies who are comfortable with e-mail) will continue to overshadow the number of Gen X and Gen Y persons for many years to come. Put simply, we boomers are still in control and will not relinquish it until we all die! And, once, we are gone, things are likely to change.

The point that I am trying to make is that while texting, Twitter and Facebook may be appropriate for informal communication among tweens, teenagers and young adults, e-mail is, and will continue to be, the major means of communication for business purposes. This is mainly because e-mail is much easier to monitor, capture, manage and oversee than texting, Twitter or Facebook. And, perhaps more importantly, unlike the previously mentioned “new” forms of communication, archived e-mail messages are now routinely used in American courts to adjudicate legal disputes that arise between individuals and companies. In other words, e-mail messages are now recognized as being part of the “official record” for legal and business purposes.

Coincidentally, on a college visit last week to a small liberal arts college, our undergraduate guide—a 20-something undergraduate communications and marketing major—quietly shared with me that she doesn’t get the whole Twitter, Facebook and texting “thing.” She said she regularly communicates with college administrators, her professors and most of her classmates via e-mail; mainly because the other forms of communication require immediate attention. And, if you are busy or have work to do or don’t want to talk to someone that can be troublesome. As far as she was concerned, e-mail was the best way to communicate. I am not sure whether or not she said what she did about e-mail for my sake, because during our conversation, she paused for a moment to read a text message from her friend admonishing her that she was late for a lunch date.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Believe it or not, I was interviewed by Karl Schmieder of Bridge 6, a digital healthcare marketing firm about the genesis of BioCrowd and why online networking is important for bioprofessionals and healthcare providers. This is a first for me and it signals that online networking for life scientists and other bioprofessionals may actually be starting to catch on. You can read the entire interview by clicking here.

While most other sites like Benchfly, Epernicus, Labspaces, ResearchGate and others cater almost exclusively to scientists, BioCrowd was created as an online networking and career development site for ALL bioprofessionals including those involved with marketing, manufacturing, publishing, writing, fun raising etc. We want prospective BioCrowd members to think of the community as a “one-stop-shopping” site for life sciences professionals who want to network, advance a career or even start  up a biotechnology company! Check us out!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting (I hope to see you at BioCrowd!)

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Facebook has over 500 million users and Twitter has close to 175 million who write 95 million tweets daily. Conventionally wisdom suggests that using either of the platforms to advertise or brand a product or service would be a no brainer. However, my experience with paid ads on Facebook (I haven’t tried Twitter yet) suggests that the ROI on using social media to advertise may not be that substantial. There is no question that using social media tools like Facebook, Twitter, GroupOn  to build brand awareness or create a buzz about a product or service or to share coupons is extremely useful. But for straight up advertising and click through rates—not so much!!!

I will be the first to admit that I know little about marketing and advertising (although I did take an advertising class as a microbiology major @Cornell). However, the sheer number of users on Facebook and LinkedIn, suggested that I may be able to grow membership @ BioCrowd and promote readership @ BioJobBlog by advertising on these platforms. To that end,  I invested several hundred dollars into advertising campaigns on both platforms. Unfortunately neither campaign had any noticeable effects on enrollment at BioCrowd or readership at BioJobBlog. I attributed the lack of success of these campaigns to my woeful understanding of the arcane disciplines of marketing and advertising —I am a scientist, after all! 

Imagine my surprise (and delight) when I read an article in a local newspaper entitled “More and More Executives Using Social Media to Promote Business” which described several business owner’s experiences with advertising on social media that were identical to mine! Like me, they thought that advertising on Facebook and other social media platforms was so obvious that they couldn’t pass on the opportunity. Also, like me, they were extremely disappointed with the results. For example, a Princeton, NJ-based clothes retailer (which caters to college students) invested $500 on a Facebook ad. While the ad, that offered 20 percent discounts on clothing, received 1 million page views, not a single one translated into a sale! Others described similar experiences. I guess the old saying “misery loves company” may be apt here.

Although some still consider social media to be a passing fan, I strongly disagree. I think that social media is clearly here to stay and has become an essential way in which we communicate with one another. That said, because social media is only about six years old, it may be too soon to determine whether or not advertising on Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn or other social media platforms can translate into a reasonable ROI. I guess only time (and money) will tell!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

BioCrowd (www.biocrowd.com) and Quertle (www.quertle.info) announced today that BioCrowd has enhanced its site by embedding Quertle's semantic biomedical search engine. BioCrowd is an online networking site for bioprofessionals that offers it members discussions, blogs, podcasts, job searching tools, and research product reviews. With the addition of literature searching capability via Quertle's new generation biomedical search engine, BioCrowd has evolved into a one-stop site for persons involved in biomedical research.

Quertle's search engine uses advanced linguistic methods to find conceptual relationships, not just query terms scattered throughout a document. Searches yield highly relevant documents instead of the long lists of sometimes incomprehensible results offered by other literature search sites. Quertle's pioneering approaches, including Power Terms™ - which represent entire classes of related concepts such as "diseases" - provide its users with a means to quickly get answers and make discoveries through literature searches.

By accessing Quertle through BioCrowd, community members will now have full access to a gamut of web resources routinely used by life scientists. "Embedding Quertle in BioCrowd adds the best literature searching capability to an existing tool chest of key web resources," said Professor Vincent Racaniello, a virologist at Columbia University School of Medicine and a BioCrowd co-founder. "There is no longer a need to visit multiple sites to gain access to the tools and functionality demanded by life sciences researchers." Clifford Mintz, PhD, BioCrowd's Chief Business Officer added, "We talked to a variety of biomedical search engine companies and Quertle's product surpassed its competitors."

About BioCrowd

BioCrowd is an online networking site exclusively designed for bioscience professionals. It was started by Clifford S. Mintz and Vincent Racaniello, two longtime bioscientists, who recognized a need for junior and senior scientists to network with one another and other bioscience professionals to realize and achieve professional or career goals.

About Quertle

Quertle is a biomedical search engine focused on delivering informative results to biomedical researchers using advanced linguistic technologies and an in-depth understanding of the biomedical field.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Twitter was largely ignored by college-age students after it was introduced over three years ago. At that time, Facebook was on the rise and texting appeared to be sufficient to meet the needs of much college students. Nevertheless, over the past year or so, university researchers have begun to assess Twitter as an education tool in addition to the role it has played in shaping today’s social media usage. 

According to a recent study published in the Computer Assisted Learning, Twitter can apparently bolster student interest and engagement and grade-point average. The study followed 125 undergraduate health studies majors at a public mid-sized US university. Half of the students used Twitter whereas the other half (control) group did not. The results of the study showed that Twitter users had an average GPA half a point higher than their non-tweeting counterparts. Also, the tweeting cohort more frequently participated in class and sought out their professors to discuss course material outside of class. 

Tweeters mentioned that Twitter was a less intimidating means to express themselves in large classes. In other words, Twitter was a less anxiety ridden means to ask questions during lecture. And, perhaps more importantly, Twitter users had much greater access to instructors outside of class. Also, instructors we able to send out tweets during lectures to keep their students engaged and awake! After all, who doesn’t look at their cell phones when they are vibrating and buzzing?

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Tweeting  

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Twitter, for all intents and purposes, is arguably the hottest new tool to hit the social media scene since well.....errrrrrr....Facebook (are there really any others?). That said, everyone who is anybody has jumped on the Twitter bandwagon whether or not using Twitter has any positive or negative effects for its users. Nevertheless, insightful social media analysts like Mark Senak, author of the fabulous EyeonFDA blog, frequently attempt to assess the overall effectiveness of social media tools like Twitter on specific industries—in this case, the life sciences industry.

To make sense of the relative effectiveness (influence) of Twitter use by life sciences companies, Mark used a Twitter and Facebook assessment tool known as KLOUT.  KLOUT generates a “score” for individual Twitter feeds based on a combination of 35 different variables. The resultant scores fall into a range from 1-100 with a higher score indicating a wider range of influence. 

Not surprisingly, Mark’s analysis revealed that Twitter feeds sponsored by Roche (Roche News, 52), Novartis (Novartis, 52) and Pfizer (Pfizer News, 51), three of the world’s largest pharmaceutical companies had the most KLOUT. Not far behind were Lilly (Lillypad, 47), Pfizer (PfizerMexico), AstraZeneca (AstraZeneca, 45) and Amgen (Amgen, 44). Other companies that warrant honorable mention include: Genentech (GenentechNews, 40), Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMSNews, 40), Johnson & Johnson (JNJStories, 40) and Vertex Pharmaceuticals (VertexPharma, 39).

Interestingly, many companies sponsor multiple Twitter feeds. For example, Sanofi Aventis AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim and Novartis have five, JNJ has 4 and Roche, Baxter and Amgen have 3. It isn’t clear to me why companies would want to have more than one Twitter feed; doesn’t that dilute corporate messaging? But, then again, what do I know?  I am not a marketing or PR guy!

So, what does this all mean? As far as I can tell—not much! The only conclusion that I can draw from all of this is that Twitter, the most recent successful addition to the social media armamentarium, is no longer new but here to stay!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Tweeting!!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is one of those federal agencies that everyone loves to hate. Sometimes I think the FDA is more vilified than the Internal Revenue Service! Nevertheless, FDA’s mission is to provide the American public with safe and efficacious foods, medicines and cosmetics. And, despite some highly publicized missteps like Vioxx and Avandia in recent years, the agency has done a great job since it was created in 1930.

Mark Senak, who writes the always interesting and incisive EyeonFDA blog, published a piece outlining what consumer may expect from FDA this year. The highlights on his list include:

• Draft guidance regarding the Internet and the use of social media
• Increased enforcement of social media in the life sciences industry
• Renewed interest on divining a legal, regulatory approval pathway for biosimilars

While none of these items is new, one can only hope that the agency can finally deliver on implementing these policies.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

A recent Pew Research report released this December showed that 43 per cent of adults aged 55 to 64 who have Internet access regularly use social networking sites. This is compared with only 9 per cent of persons in this age group, who used social networking sites in December, 2008. 

While the use of social networking sites grew among all age groups to 83 percent (from 67% in 2008), the largest amount of new users can be found in persons ages 45 or older; their numbers doubled over the past few years. Interesting, usage amount adults 74 or older has quadrupled and roughly 16% of folks in this age group use social networking sites to stay connected to others or to research medical conditions.

Not surprisingly, social networking site usage has declined somewhat amongst teenagers as they increasingly go mobile and texting is the way they stay connected. A troubling trend amongst teenagers is a 50 percent reduction in blogging that has taken place from 2006 to 2009. This suggests that teens may be writing and reading less which is quite troubling since most college freshmen need remedial training in reading and writing. Unfortunately, blogging seems to have been replaced with Facebook and Twitter updates: another ominous trend.

There is no doubt that social networking sites are beginning to reach their full maturity. It isn’t clear what will be the next big thing on the web. But, whatever it is, I hope that it will be as exciting as social media!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting (use social media to find a new job it is de rigueur)

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

A new report released by Deloitte LLP entitled “To Friend or Not? New Insights about Social Networks in the Life Sciences Industry” indicates that roughly 65 percent of survey life sciences company professionals say their companies use or plan on using social networks in some capacity at a corporate level. Interestingly, 35 percent of those surveyed have no plans to do so!

Survey respondents say the lack of Food and Drug Administration (FDA) guidelines, consumer privacy concerns and a lack of a clearly demonstrated return on investment are the top three hurdles to widespread adoption of social networking platforms.

Even after the FDA guidelines for social networking are issued (who knows when that will be?), more than half (53 percent) of respondents still expect a significant amount of confusion around how life sciences companies can engage with social networks. Forty-six of companies that already use social networking tools will continue to use them but will not increase investment until the FDA provides guidance.

More than one-third of respondents (38 percent) are waiting for the FDA to issue guidance before making any investment. Nearly three in 10 respondents (28 percent) said their companies are waiting to see what ROI other companies get. However, the majority (73 percent) expect the budget allocated for social networking will increase over the next three years.

Additional findings from the report that surveyed marketing/brand management professionals include:

• Approximately 44 percent have an informal strategy for social networking that is not documented and/or fully supported by leadership, while 32 percent have no strategy at all.
• Survey respondents use social networking to disseminate information (51 percent), proactively seek information (42 percent), or to react or respond to pertinent information posted on an online social network (23 percent).
• One in five (20 percent) are indifferent to using social networking.

One of the authors of the study suggested that “Our survey findings demonstrate that the bulk of the use for social networking now is geared largely towards marketing. However, there are additional strategic applications beyond pure marketing still to evolve, such as conducting market research cheaper and faster; working with foundations to mobilize patients; improving peer-to-peer education through cost-effective medical education; determining the right patient reported outcomes; and providing data to help speed-up clinical trials.”

I have long contended that the least likely application of social media in the life sciences industry would be for promotional and marketing purposes. While this previously was a minority position, Jonathan Richmond, who authors the popular social media and marketing blog “Dose of Digital”, finally agreed with me in a recent post, entitled “Social Media is Not for Advertising Pharma Brands.”

Unfortunately, much of the early conversations surrounding the use of social media in the life sciences industry were promulgated by pharmaceutical marketing consultants and product brand managers. The early emphasis on promotional use caused many pharma executives to head for their command bunkers at the mere mention of social media (mainly because of its possible regulatory implications). Luckily, less financially-motivated persons began to join the conversation and successfully floated ideas about less regulatory risky uses of social media. Interestingly, the promotional use of social media in the life sciences industry is no longer the main topic of conversations at most pharma and social media conferences these days.

It appears that most life sciences companies are willing to concede that social media is not a fad and not going away anytime soon. As the old adage goes “You gotta be in it to win it.”

Until next time...

Good Lucking and Good Surfing!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

While the debate rages on over the use of social media in the life sciences industry, industry experts and insiders have largely ignored the growing importance of mobile healthcare and its use by healthcare professionals and patients. Consumers and professionals are increasingly using their mobile devices for healthcare information. They are also interacting with healthcare providers and colleagues on their mobile phones. 85% of US consumers have cell phones and growing vs. only 65% of Americans which have broadband access. Further, the divide between mobile use and broadband Internet access is increasing. According to a Manhattan Research report 70% of Physicians say PDAs/Smartphones are "essential" to their practice.

Because of the growing importance of mobile healthcare communications, the Manhattan-based Business Development Institute decided to organize a conference around this theme. The primary goal of the conference is to address the following questions:

1. How do healthcare brands connect and interact with consumers via mobile strategies?
2. How do healthcare brands connect and interact with healthcare professionals via mobile strategies?
3. What are the leading technologies being used for mobile strategies?
4. How do you deal with regulatory hurdles when implementing mobile campaigns?
5. How do you integrate your mobile strategies into your enterprise-wide marketing, communications and social media platforms?
6. What are the leading monitoring and measuring approaches/technologies being employed for mobile campaigns?

Person giving presentations at the meeting include:

Lance Hill, CEO, Within3
Ray Kerins, Vice President/Worldwide Communications, Pfizer Inc.
Marc Monseau, Director, Corporate Communications and Social Media, Johnson & Johnson
Todd Siesky, Public Relations Manager, Roche Diabetes Care
 
Date: Wednesday, January 19, 2011
Time: 8:00 a.m. - 1:00 p.m.
Location: The Graduate Center of The City University of NY; 365 Fifth Avenue; New York, New York 10016
Registration Fee: $195
Website:http://www.bdionline.com/mobilehealthcare.html

For more information, including registration, please click here to visit the event website. Use promo code BC for a discounted rate of $155.

Please contact Steve Etzler at setzler@bdionline.com or 212-765-8045 for additional information.

See you at the meeting!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

At present, 74 percent of adult Americans use the Internet according at a recent Pew survey. While Twitter continues to be one of the hottest new social media tools and Facebook still dominates the social web, do both really live up to the media hype? Let’s start with Twitter.

A new study released last Thursday by the Pew Research Center found that about 8 per cent of active American Internet users are also enthusiastic about Twitter. Of the 8 per cent, 2 percent indicated that they are extremely active and use it daily as a source of new content and links to other websites and services. Further, it appears that black and Latino persons are twice as likely as compared with whites to use Twitter. Whether or not Twitter can increase its use among all Americans still remains to be seen.

Facebook is still the 800 lb gorilla in the room and without a doubt the world’s largest online networking site. However, Facebook growth is starting to slow a bit and issue surrounding privacy and free speech considerations are starting to take its toll. There is no doubt that Facebook is a content-generating machine. According to an article in the NY Times, Facebook’s “more than 500 million users upload more than 1.0 billion pieces of content a day.” Unfortunately, because of Facebook’s expansive size, it is becoming increasingly difficult to find relevant and useful content on the site. Interestingly, Facebook users are turning to the site to gain access or find information to “ebooks.” Finally, roughly 70 per cent of recruiters and hiring managers are using Facebook (and other networking sites like LinkedIn) to source job candidates or conduct background checks on prospective new hires.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

What a difference six months can make in the fast moving world of the social web! At last May’s Advanced Learning Institute’s conference on “Social Media for Pharma” there was a lot of anxiety, hand wringing and concern about the future of social media in the life sciences industry. 

Things were much different at “Social Media for Pharma” (also sponsored by the Advance Learning Institute) held earlier this week in Manhattan. Like last May’s meeting, there was still much speculation about when the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) may provide the much awaited regulatory guidance on the use of social media for promotional purposes in the pharmaceutical industry. And, despite a presentation by FDA representatives at the meeting—that somewhat paradoxically described how the agency was using social media tools like Twitter, YouTube and Facebook to better educate and inform the American public about its activities and services —there were no hints about when the agency may issuing that guidance. Nevertheless, the number of pharma and biotechnology companies that have decided to “take the plunge into the social media pool” has grown substantially since last May. In fact, I got the sense that many of the conference participants were beginning to believe that implementing social media strategies was possible even if the agency fails to issue the long awaited guidance!

Generally speaking, there was a growing consensus at the meeting that the use of social media for promotional purposes—specifically to bolster sales of approved and marketed drugs and devices—may not be its best use. Several presentations, most notably those offered by Justin Gardener and Lindsey Hart from Advanced BioHealing, Inc and Jenny Keeney from Astellas Pharma US, Inc showed how social media can be used by life sciences companies to improve healthcare outcomes for patients and promote science education to improve the public understanding of science. Nancy Buono Cartwright from Kaiser Permanente gave a great talk on how to use social media to enhance corporate communication and employee participation and retention. 

A panel discussion featuring Dennis Urbaniak, Sanofi Aventis, Cynthia Phillips, Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc and Justin Gardner, Advanced BioHealing, Inc and lead by John Mack aka the Pharma Guy was insightful and extremely illuminating regarding pharma’s changing attitudes toward social media. All of the panelists agreed that the drug industry is in transition and that now may be the time to try new things to get back to addressing unmet medical and patient needs. More importantly, Dennis Urbaniak stressed that pharma must begin to listen to what patients and stakeholders want rather than dictating or imposing “its” ideas and products on them. And, that it is apparent that social media provides an ideal vehicle to accomplish that goal.

Finally, Doug Levy, a compliance lawyer and Executive Director of Communications and Public Affairs Columbia Medical Center, gave an inspiring talk on how social media is no different than traditional modes of communication and that best practices already exist whether or not FDA ever issues any additional guidance on the topic! It appears that it is no longer a question of “if” but “when” as pharma continues to warm to inevitability of social media.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Tweeting or Whatever Your SM Tool of Choice May Be

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

I just returned from the American Society of Human Genetics (ASHG) annual meeting that was held this past week in Washington, DC. On the surface, the meeting was not much different from the others that I typically attend—I was providing resume critiquing services and career counseling to graduate students and postdoctoral fellows. But, this meeting felt different to me than most and I couldn’t quite explain why! That is; until I read a blog post by Magali Charmot-Sauva entitled “Are Scientist Purely Rational”

The gist of the post was that scientists are not much different than non-scientists and like most “normal” people they do have emotions and secrets that have little to do with science! In other words, scientists are “just like everyone else” as Charmot-Sauva contends. But, she posits that society has convinced scientists that they are different and most have embraced the notion. 

After reading the post, I started thinking about the different feeling that I had at ASGH this past week. Many of the graduate students and postdocs that I talked with were folks engaged in rare disease research, genetic counseling, diagnostics and epidemiology. In other words, unlike most research scientists, they were working on serious “human” diseases and closer in many ways to the people who suffer from them. Put simply, the label “human genetics” rather than molecular or biochemical etc somehow permits these scientists to more easily express their humanity and ultimately their humanness! And, interestingly enough, the ASGH leadership sponsored a symposium for students and postdocs designed to improve their communication skills with the news media and the lay public. Clearly the ASHG leadership understands that scientists and “normal people” need to communicate with and get to know one another better.

The lack of emphasis on communication and interpersonal skills in most graduate programs sends the wrong message to graduate students and postdocs. Most interpret this to mean that they are not necessary or important for a successful scientific career. And it also helps to promulgate the myth it is okay for scientists to be different than other people. While this may be acceptable for some academics (they don’t get out much anyway), it is entirely unacceptable in the non-academic science world where a premium is placed on well honed oral and written communication skills. 

For those of you who may not believe me, take a look at some of the job ads for industrial scientist positions. Invariably, all require that prospective job candidates have outstanding written and oral communication skills. In the past, companies were willing to overlook these requirements in order to acquire the requisite technical skills that they needed. However, there is currently a glut of PhD-trained bioscientists in today’s market and life sciences hiring managers no longer have to sacrifice any requirements in order to hire the best job candidates. That said, I think it is time for scientists to “come out of their ivory towers” and learn what it means to communicate and be human again!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Communicating!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Vincent Racaniello, a BioCrowd founder and Professor of Microbiology at Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons published an article on PLOS Pathogens entitled “Social Media and Microbiology.”

Vincent, a virologist by training, has spent the past 30 years at Columbia where he has been recognized for numerous achievements including identification and characterization of the human polio virus receptor, the creation of transgenic mice to study the neural tropism of the polio virus and the identification of viral virulence factors that contribute to the pathogenesis of a variety of viral infections. His contributions to the field of virology have resulted in a number of honors including the Eli Lilly Award, a Harvey Lectureship, a 10 year Merit Award from NIH and editor of the Journal of Virology and other peer reviewed microbiology journals.

While not conducting laboratory research and teaching virology to undergraduates and graduate students, Vincent spends a considerable amount of time writing for his blog the Virology Blog and creating podcasts for his award winning show entitled TWIV (This Week in Virology). He is a committed educator and firmly believes that his role as a scientist is to improve the public understanding of infectious diseases and science in general. 

The introduction to his article aptly describes his philosophy about social media and science education.

“Social media consists of Internet technologies that allow users to create and share content, and to foster dialogues among other users. Examples include software applications for communication (blogging, social networking, discussion forums), collaboration (wikis, social bookmarking), and multimedia (sharing photographs, video, and livecasting). In the world of science, social media is becoming an increasingly integral component of both research and education. My experience with two types of social media, blogging and podcasting, has convinced me that scientists must embrace these applications to enhance research, and to better communicate their work to the public.”

If you want to learn more about Vincent or chat with him, he can frequently be found at BioCrowd interacting with undergraduates, graduate students, postdocs and even colleagues from time to time.

Until next time...

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

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

The New York Times today reported that the average teenager sends more than six text messages in every waking hour. This finding was based on a study conducted by the rating company Nielsen that analyzed mobile phone usage by 13-to 17-year olds from April to June this year. 

The average teenager sends or receives 3,339 text messages per month. Teenage girls averaged a mind-boggling 4,050 text messages per month (substantiating the notion that girls are more verbal (?) than boys). And, over all teenagers send texts twice as often at 18-to 24-year olds, who receive or send only 1,630 texts per month.

Not surprisingly, teenagers are making fewer phone calls and even used fewer minutes than their grandparents, many of whom are uncomfortable using cell phones as compared with landlines.

The findings led one Nielsen executive to quip “Teenagers growing up now don’t even think the phone is primarily for voice. It’s primarily for text.” As the father of three teenagers, I can attest to that. That said, wouldn’t it be wonderful if kids spent as much time studying as they did texting???? Maybe that would help to combat our decreasing competitiveness in math and science!!!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Texting!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

I have tried to steer clear of the Facebook frenzy mainly because I don’t like the platform (it is too unwieldy) and frankly, pretty boring. I would be lying if I said I don’t have several accounts and regularly use it to advertise some of my own entrepreneurial ventures. After all, how can 500,000 million users be wrong? 

However, with the release of the movie The Social Network and Mark Zuckerberg’s recent foray into saving Newark, NJ and secondary education, it is getting difficult to avoid entering the fracas (not to mention that it is good for SEO).

While the popularity of Facebook continues to grow, it is becoming increasingly difficult for new and even long time users for figure out how to successfully use the platform. To overcome the difficulties and complexities of Facebook, the folks over at CollegeCrunch.org posted an article to help college students (and others) makes Facebook “less annoying” to use. 

I find this extremely ironic, since college students were the first Facebook users and mainly responsible for its meteoric rise in social media circles! 

10 Ways to Make Facebook Less Annoying 

While Facebook has grown and evolved a whole lot from when it first was created, it seems as though it also seems to be losing some popularity. People who have had Facebook for years have noticed the drastic changes and numerous page layouts and defaults that have changed Facebook in recent years. The following changes could help Facebook turn around its image and be a little less annoying:

1. Friend requests procedure
Unless you have some major privacy settings set on your account, it's fairly easy for anyone you know- or don't know for that matter, to send you a friend request on Facebook. The problem arises when you don't know or care to be friends with that person and you ignore their request. You can then be bombarded by repeated attempts which can be annoying and creepy. Making it impossible for someone to send you a friend request once you have denied them, would make the Facebook procedure a lot less annoying. 

2. College students only
When Facebook first started, only college students and staff were able to join and create profiles. Facebook required you to have some type of university administered email that had to be verified before users could join. Now that just anyone can join, it allows all sorts of people you don't want to be friends with send you friend requests. When you start getting friend requests from your parents, grandparents, aunts and uncles, and then people you don't even know you begin to wish Facebook went back to just letting university students and staff in on the network.

3. Limit status updates
Everyone has someone on their Facebook that updates their status and informs you of every step along the way in their day. Not only can documenting their day on Facebook become extremely annoying, it's also an open door for other people to know where you are and what you are doing. We don't really need to know who's eating what and with whom, who's fighting with their significant other and how drunk someone is, it's best to limit the amount of times a person could update their status a day- it would be a lot less annoying and probably stop a lot of people from yelling at their computer screens or phones. 

4. Eliminate Farmville
While Farmville and other games on Facebook seem to have plenty of followers, the people that don't play these games shouldn't have to be subjected to constantly view their progress in the game. A group has even been started on Facebook that invites discussion and provides info for those that hate games entitled "I don't care about your farm, or your fish, or your park, or your mafia!!!" That group alone has over 6 million members, and is a sign that the elimination of that game and many others would make a lot of people on Facebook less annoyed. 

5. The layout wasn't changed so often
If you've been a user with Facebook over the last several years you'll know that the layout is changed quite frequently. It seems as though just as you are getting used to the current layout, it is changed again and you are left wondering how to navigate through things and don't know where to find certain settings, applications, and general things on your home page or profile. Plenty of Facebook users find this extremely annoying, as sometimes it takes days to figure out and get used to the new layout, for it only to be changed and relearned in a couple of months.

6. Easier and more understandable privacy and account settings
It seems that anytime you are trying to customize or change privacy or account settings, its not very easy to navigate through. It would help a great deal if the privacy settings were clear enough to where you do not have to individually manage settings and type in every single person's name in your blocked or not blocked lists. It seems as though anytime you want to change something in your privacy settings, it's going to take a while, and that can be very annoying.

7. Categorize picture tagging
As if picture tagging wasn't a chore in itself, the fact pictures can not be tagged in separate groups can be very annoying. Since most of us on Facebook like to limit our profiles from certain friends, coworkers, or family members, it's kind of annoying that you can't also group and tag your photos in some way so that they can be under different categories. That would save a lot of time and frustration when uploading and tagging pictures.

8. Block applications, event invitations, etc.
We've all been all that point when our notifications are nothing but event invitations, invitations to join a certain cause, or to join a certain group. If you are one of the ones that finds this annoying, you can modify your settings so that you don't receive a notification whenever you receive one. It would probably just be less annoying to be able to block all invitations in general, because even if you modify your notifications, the events and invitations will still show up on your home page.

9. Don't accept just anyone
While some people feel bad denying friend requests with people they don't know or would just not rather catch up with, being choosy with who you decide to accept as a friend is pretty important. Accepting someone just because you don't want to feel bad or don't want them to keep requesting you is going to annoy you more when you can't stand to see their walls, status updates, and photo albums. So, keep it easier on yourself and don't accept people you'd rather not having anything to do with.

10. Delete your account
If you really are at the breaking point with Facebook and find yourself so annoyed with it all the time, there are two options. You can either limit the amount of times you login per week so that you dont have to be bothered and annoyed by people's pictures, updates, and wall posts, or you can delete your account all together and never worry about Facebook annoying you again.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Following!!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Whether you like President Obama or not, the changes he made in the leadership at the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is beginning to yield results. After just two years, the agency is well on its way to modernization and overcoming its descent into the dark ages during the failed Bush Administration.

Mark Senak, the intrepid author of the EyeonFDA blog has been assiduously following and blogging about many of the new things going on at the agency. First, in a post a last week, Mark noted that FDA has updated its website and created a product recall page that collects recall information on all of the products that it regulates and deposited it in an easy to find product recall page. With product recalls in the food and life sciences industry increasing in frequency, this page will help to alert consumers about tainted products before learning of them on the nightly news. 

Second, Mark points out that FDA has finally entered the 21^st century and is now fully engaged in social media.

“FDA begins to join the 21st Century launching a Facebook page that has been long anticipated on this blog. FDA has not completed the Social Media Quadrant - (1) a blog, (2) several twitter feeds (3) a YouTube channel, and (4) a Facebook page.  And as added good measure, the agency opened a Flickr page.  The agency is now fully engaged in activities that many in the industry it regulates think is forbidden them.... And the beat goes on.”

Finally, earlier this week FDA announced that it would hold long-awaited public hearings to get input on proposed biosimilar regulatory guidance. As Mark duly notes, this process is likely to be contentious and protracted.    

"The FDA has set November 2-3 for a meeting to get input on a wide span of questions regarding the development of a regulatory pathway for biosimilars.  The scope of the questions is demonstrative of the number of outstanding issues the agency faces and will likely result in a protracted process. "

Central to the debate (and ultimate success of biosimilars) is the question of interchangeability and substitution of name brand products with biosimilar molecules. According to Mark, the agency will focus on the following questions

"What factors should the agency consider in determining whether a proposed interchangeable biological product can be "expected to produce the same clinical result as the reference product in any given patient?"

"What factors should the agency consider in evaluating the potential risk related to alternating or switching between use of the proposed interchangeable biological product and the reference product or among interchangeable biological products?"

What has become patently obvious to many of us who have been following the debate over the last decade is that unless biosimilars are interchangeable or substitutable for brand name biologics, the commercial success of the biosimilar industry may be in serious jeopardy. Put simply, there is no question that safe and effective biosimilars can be manufactured; the real question is whether or not physicians will prescribe biosimilar products if they are required to be branded by regulatory agencies. This is because physicians are reluctant to switch patients to new biologic products if a patient is doing well on a currently prescribed regimen. Since most physicians pay little attention to drug pricing, it is highly unlikely that they will switch a patient to product simply because there may be a 20 percent reduction in drug price. And, unless biosimilar products are deemed interchangeable with their branded counterparts, pharmacists (based on insurance formularies) will not be able to offer patients a generic equivalent of a name brand biologics. 

With the cost of biologic treatments skyrocketing, it will be interesting to see what the agency will do with this question.

Until next time...

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

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Over the past few months, a number of celebrities have agreed to help pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies pitch their products in direct-to-consumer advertising campaigns. Perhaps this is related to the economic downturn and these actors are having trouble finding high paying gigs to support their lifestyles. Alternatively, their motives may be altruistic or they or one of their loved ones may suffer from a life-altering or threatening illness.

The latest addition to the celebrity pitchperson parade is the soap opera diva Susan Lucci. After her husband Helmut Huber was unexpectedly diagnosed a decade ago with atrial fibrillation—a type of irregular heartbeat that increase the risk of stroke five-fold, Lucci yesterday announced that she and her husband would partner with Boehringer Ingelheim the National Stroke Association and StopAfib.org to launch a new education campaign to raise awareness of atrial fibrillation. Financial terms of the relationship were not disclosed.

In other news, Amgen and Pfizer yesterday announced the joint launch of "Psophisticated Style:  A Guide to Everyday Style and Psoriasis™," an online resource, providing a wealth of style advice specifically for people with psoriasis.

The new online presence will be hosted by B-list celebrity Tim Gunn, mentor to the designers on TV's "Project Runway" and chief creative officer of Liz Claiborne, Inc. and dermatologist Susan C. Taylor, M.D., the style guide includes five videos, which illustrate various style issues for individuals with psoriasis. Practical and insightful highlights from each video are also available and can be printed.  The new website is well designed and has a decidedly web 2.0 look and feel to it. And, you can even follow Psophisticated Style on Facebook and share the site with your friends!

According to a press release Addressing Psoriasis™ was developed to inspire people with plaque psoriasis to actively manage their condition, be more confident and not allow the condition to inhibit their everyday style. 

Despite the slow uptake, Pharma’s attitude on the use of social media is beginning to shift. Last week, Eli Lilly &Co announced the launch of Lilly Pad a blog and twitter feed designed to provide information and helpful tips to patients with diabetes. Yesterday at the Business Development Institute’s HealthCare Social Communications Leadership Forum in Manhattan, Todd Siesky , Public Relations Manager, Roche Diabetes Care described an innovative and creative initiative (started two years ago) to establish a network of influential bloggers in the diabetes space. The bloggers are not paid and do not benefit financially from their interactions with the company. Roche interacts with the blogging network on a quarterly basis and has held two summits to bring the bloggers together to brainstorm and interact with one another (Roche covers airfare and hotel accommodations).

Also, Ted Phelan, Senior Regional Scientific Manager Medical Affairs at Astra Zeneca gave an illuminating talk about his company’s efforts to build a physician community in the gastrointestinal therapeutic space. Ted’s take away from his impromptu presentation (the originally scheduled Astra Zeneca representative couldn’t attend) was you won’t be successful unless you understand the needs of community members (he is married to a physician).

For those of you who may not closely follow the pharmaceutical social media space, building Facebook fan pages and creating a Twitter feed are no longer de rigueur. Instead, the next big thing is building company-sponsored, unbranded, online patient and physician communities around different therapeutic indications! Move over Patients Like Me, there may be some new kids on the block in the very near future!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Tweeting!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

A recent report published by the Pew Internet and American Life Project found that in the last year, social networking services have nearly doubled in popularity in Americans over the age of 50. Interesting, there were virtually no inroads among those aged 18 to 29. The spike in popularity also includes those over 65 years old who are twice as likely this year as compared with last to say that they belonged to social networking sites.

The authors of the report suggest a few reasons for the increasing popularity of social networking among seniors (aside from the observation that older people are slower overall to adopt technological innovations). 

First, social networking sites provide a rare opportunity to bridge the generational divide; for example grandparents and grandchildren can keep track of each other or share family photos on a single network like Facebook. Second, many older Americans use Facebook and even Twitter to reconnect with people from their past. Finally, social networking sites have been around for almost a decade and there are growing signs that younger folks are moving beyond social networking sites like Facebook and Twitter to the next big thing (whatever that may be).

While online networking sites may have begun to outlive their usefulness for social activities, there is trend toward the use of these sites for professional purposes including job searches and access to information. LinkedIn and BioCrowd are two good examples of this type of online professional networking sites.

FYI, I rarely visit Facebook and occasionally have time for Twitter (I turned 57 this past July). Most of my online time is spent on LinkedIn and BioCrowd looking for new contacts and access to interesting information about the life sciences industry. 

Just sayin’

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Surfing!!!!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Mark Senak, author of the EyeonFDA blog and a feisty social media advocate and enthusiast today reported that the long awaited FDA guidelines for the use of social media by life sciences companies might not be completed until 2012. 

Mark, who is attending the Food and Drug Law Institute Advertising and Promotion Conference being held in Washington, D.C. (#FDLIAP), based his timeline on remarks made by during presentations by a couple of FDA employees from the Division of Drug Marketing, Advertising and Communications (DDMAC). According to Mark:

“A process begun in 2009 may see a milestone in 2010 with issuance of draft guidance, followed by commentary and revision and the issuance of a final of what will be much guidance, apparently.  A three year "event.”

Further, Mark offered this assessment:

“The Internet and social media landscape moves at the speed of light.  Consider that Twitter only came into existence three years ago.  The development of each new platform introduces new questions into the equation.  Consider the frequency and with what depth and breadth consumers consult the Internet and social media for health care information, and we have a priority that demands something faster than a three year event.”

While I agree with Mark that FDA should act faster to develop guidelines for the use of social media for promotional and non-promotional purposes, the existing guidelines for print and broadcast media are sufficient for companies (which abide by DDMAC regulations) to launch successful social media campaigns. A great example of this is Novo Nordisk’s novel Twitter campaign entitled “Race with Insulin” in which professional race car driver Charlie Kimball tweets about his use of Novo’s insulin products.  Novo contends that the campaign helps to dispel the notion that persons with type I diabetes are limited in what they can do personally and professionally (it also helps to sell more insulin!)

Some industry insiders and bloggers think that Novo’s Twitter campaign may be inappropriate and ill-advised. Like it or not, the Race with Insulin Twitter campaign is compliant with existing DDMAC regulations and no different than many other direct-to-consumer advertising campaigns that use paid company spokespersons. Personally, I think that criticism of the campaign is nothing more than “sour grapes,” i.e. Novo figured it out before other pharma marketers did!

The lack of FDA guidance on the use of social media will certainly hinder and perhaps deter other pharma companies from leveraging the true power of social media. However, the old adage “where there is a will, there is way” is particularly apt for those companies that are seriously considering social media in the absence of any notable regulatory guidance on the subject.

Until next time....

Good Luck and Good Tweeting!!!!!!!!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

The ever watchful Mark Senak of the highly informative EyeonFDA blog today reported that Eli Lilly had taken the social media plunge by creating a twitter account (@Lillypad) and also launching a blog cleverly entitled the LillyPad (get it; pad=launching point etc and the word pad is hot because of the iPAD). Ah, those clever pharmaceutical marketers; they never miss a thing!

As Mark points out in his post, Lilly had previously launched a YouTube Channel in 2008 called LillyDiabetes that almost immediately disappeared after he first blogged about it! According to the EyeonFDA post Lilly launched the blog and joined Twitter

"[b]ecause we feel passionately about a lot of issues that are important to our company and our industry, and we know there's plenty of passion well beyond our own walls.  Policy issues like health care reform have been top-of-mind with the public for a long time.  And industry watchers are placing an increased premium on trends like corporate citizenship.  These are important dialogues, and we're happy to provide a forum and participate."

However, as Mark aptly posited in his post, why are we so amazed when a pharmaceutical company launches a blog or engages in a social media campaign? After all, recent research indicates that nearly one-third of companies are blogging and that number is expected to increase to 43 percent by 2012. In fact, pharmaceutical company blogs are quickly becoming de rigueur. So, don’t be surprised if other companies jump on the social media bandwagon over the coming months. Maybe in the future the launch of a pharmaceutical blog, Facebook page or Twitterfeed may no longer be big news or even worthy of a blog post!

A quick perusal of the LillyPad blog reveals that many of the posts deal with issues like improving math and science education, job creation, American innovation, and healthcare solutions. Interestingly, many of these posts are consistent with recent public statements made by Lilly’s CEO John Lechleiter, PhD. It would be great if the LillyPad blog continues to post articles that provide Lilly stakeholders with insights into what management is thinking. This will certainly go a long way to help to create a “conversation’ between the blog and its followers: something that is critical to the success of any corporate social media campaign.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (2)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Looking for a job can be overwhelming, time consuming and emotionally draining. Recognizing this, BioCrowd founders Cliff Mintz and Vincent Racaniello began searching for a tool that would help to reduce the pain associated with looking for a job. To that end, BioCrowd in association with Career Management Source, Inc— an emerging, life sciences recruiting management software company —are pleased to announce the launch of the BioJob Center at the BioCrowd.

The BioJob Center offers both job seekers and employers ‘real time,’ current job listings, application tracking, and e-mail job alerts. Job seekers can search for jobs (based on job title and/or location) and directly apply for them from the job center.

Employers can list job openings; advertise jobs; call out ‘hot jobs’ or search candidate resume databases. Jobs posted to the BioJob Center are also simultaneously listed on other job sites including www.JobJobHealth.com and Twitter Jobs. Other job boards and sites will be added in the near future.

The search engine that powers the job center was specifically designed to automatically ‘pull’ thousands of job listings from life sciences corporate websites, bioscience job boards and other sources. Job search results are updated in real time and positions that have already been filled are automatically eliminated from search results. This feature prevents job seekers from wasting time applying for jobs that no longer exist!

Job seekers can post their resumes and join the BioJob Center for free! One of the cooler features of the new tool is customized candidate e-mail alerts. Job seekers who use this feature receive alerts when new jobs (that meet specifications) are posted to the BioJob Center or added in real time by the search engine. This helps to save time by avoiding multiple visits to job boards and conducting an endless number of Google searches.

Whether you are a job seeker or employer, Vincent and I believe that the BioJob Center will help to expedite and alleviate some of the stress associated with job searches.

Please visit the BioJob Center today and let us know what you think! Also, those of you who may have suggestions, ideas, kudos, kvetches, etc please feel free to contact me!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Over 70 percent of hiring managers and HR professionals routinely use Google to find out more about prospective job candidates. While many jobseekers know this and do everything possible to expunge deleterious and compromising information from a Google search on their names, some don’t know that Facebook profiles are a routine target of all Google searches. Consequently, hiring managers may have access to some personal information (including photos) that may jeopardize a job candidate’s prospects.  

Today, German government officials proposed a new law that would place restrictions on employers who want to use Facebook profiles to recruit and vet job candidates. The bill would allow hiring managers to search for publicly accessible information about prospective employees on the Web and to view pages on job networking sites like LinkedIn, BioCrowd and Xing.  But it would not allow employers to access or use information about job candidates on purely social networks like Facebook. The proposed law would also prohibit companies from secretly videotaping employees except in certain areas as long as they disclosed the fact.

The idea of crafting legislation to limit company access to personal information of job candidates found on social networks like Facebook, Ning and others reveals the underlying paradox of the social media phenomenon. That is that people publicly, voluntarily and willingly offer private and intimate information about themselves as part of their right to freedom of expression and then that information can be used against them! In other words, the transparency and inherent freedom of expression offered by social media can in reality hinder, restrict or inhibit the professional and social opportunities of those who use it. I highly doubt that legislation similar to the proposed German law would ever see the light of day in the US.

For now, I highly recommend that jobseekers continue to routinely Google themselves to see what information is “out there” about them. Also, continue to limit access to personal profiles on Facebook and any other “purely social” online networking sites that you may belong too. Both activities will help to insure that the photo of you in a compromising position or with a beer bong in your hand won’t eliminate you as a prospective job candidate.

Until next time....

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

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Mark Senak, a pharmaceutical social media advocate and the author of the EyeonFDA blog, today reported that the Swiss pharmaceutical giant Roche published on its website a document entitled Social Media Principles. The document outlines Roche’s rules and regulations guiding the company’s use and commitment to social media.

In an accompanying statement, Roche officially affirmed the role of social media as part of its Communication Policy.

Roche actively uses Social Media to communicate with its stakeholders. As committed in our Communication Policy we want to be a transparent company and thus welcome this new form of communication.

Further, while the company recognizes the use and benefits of social media, it acknowledged the regulatory risks associated with the new medium

Roche recognizes the ubiquity and benefits of social media and welcomes its use - however, we also acknowledge that certain risks are associated with these new channels. We have therefore developed this guideline to help our employees use these new platforms in a responsible way.

Finally and perhaps most importantly, Roche appointed Sabine Kostevc as Head of
Corporate Internet and Social Media. 

Contact

Sabine Kostevc

Head of Corporate Internet and Social Media

• http://twitter.com/skoko
• global.social_media @roche.com
• Media Team

She may be the first communication executive to hold an official title that has the phrase ‘social media” associated it. Surprisingly, this may be the biggest development of all; mainly because once one pharmaceutical company does something new, they all similar to follow!

Roche’s willingness to publicly commit to the use of social media is a bold and calculated move by a company that recognizes its power and the major role it will likely play in the future of the pharmaceutical industry. Further, it suggests that Roche, unlike most of its competitors, it willing to take a proactive role in helping to shape the social media regulatory guidelines being developed by the US Food and Drug Administration. Finally, Roche executives realize that increased transparency and open communications with its stakeholder may help to improve the public image of big pharma companies and perhaps rekindle the innovation that has been sorely lacking in the industry.

The bottom line: Rather than remaining part of the problem, Roche has boldly proclaimed that it wants to be part of the solution!

Hat tip to Mark and Roche!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Tweeting err Facebooking err Blogging!!!!!!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

I read a fascinating article today posted on MedEdNews Insider Blog about the formation of a new agency called Rx Entertainment that helps to match celebrities with direct-to-consumer advertising campaigns created by pharmaceutical companies. Admittedly, I hadn’t thought much about the matching process, but in the past I have posted a few rants about direct-to-consumer advertising (DTC), Brooke Shields hawking Latisse for Allergan and the Robert Jarvik Lipitor brouhaha.

So, the post about an entertainment agency that helps to match celebrities with DTC prescription drug advertising campaigns piqued my interest. The blog post was actually an interview that was conducted by the blogger with the founder of Entertainment Rx (I love the name)! The interviewer asked the Rx Entertainment founder for examples of her agency’s matching maker prowess.  The list (see below) is very impressive:

1. Claire Danes and Brooke Shields for Latisse
2. Food Network’s Ellie Krieger for Centecor in the area of arthritis
3. Gretchen Wilson for LapBand
4. Jennifer Lopez for childhood vaccines
5. Vanessa Williams and Virginia Madsen for Botox
6. Sally Field for Boniva
7. Jim Belushi, Bruce Jenner, Danica Patrick, and Patty Loveless for COPD
8. Keri Russell on a campaign for Sanofi-Aventis  on the Sounds of Pertussis vaccine campaign
9. Angelica Huston to help launch the well-known Merck Manual
10. Elisabeth Hasselbeck and Marg Helgenberger for a fundraiser sponsored by P&G  where all the proceeds went to breast cancer research
11. Robert DeNiro to help launch a nicotine patch. He was premiering one of his films in NY and a fundraiser for cancer research was tied to the event.
12. Dara Torres worked with Centecor, and The National Psoriasis Foundation on a public service campaign to raise awareness for psoriasis
13. Hector Elizondo on a campaign for CaringforAlz; campaign focused on the caregivers of Alzheimers patients (Hector’s mother suffered from the condition).  This was a national campaign supported by the Exelon brand team at Novartis.

According to the post, Rx Entertain manages the negotiation process between the celebs and pharmaceutical/biotechnology from beginning to end. There was no mention of the salaries paid to the celebrities for their participation in the DTC ads.  However the Rx Entertainment founder did offer several bits of cautionary advice:

The celebrity spokesperson ought to have a legitimate tie to the disease and that A-list celebrities may not always be the most appropriate spokespeople because of the baggage (scheduling issues, entourage and additional difficulties) they may bring to the campaign. 

That said who knew that B-list celebs had good shots at potential careers in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries? Talk about alternate career paths!

Until next time....

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting (ever consider acting????) !!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Because I was traveling for the past couple of weeks, I missed an article entitled “Unnatural Science” by Virginia Heffernan that originally appeared in the July 31 edition of the New York Times Magazine. After returning home this past Sunday, I had the opportunity to read it and what a read it was!

 It was an apt and brilliantly written piece about the often venomous and offensive blogging that has gone on for several years at ScienceBlogs: a science blogging collective overseen by the Seed Media Group. Interestingly, BioJobBlog was approached about a year ago by the Seed Media Group to consider blogging under the ScienceBlogs umbrella. For those of you who may not know, the bloggers who write for ScienceBlogs get paid based on the amount of site traffic that their blogs generate. While the sums of money that are paid are nominal, graduate students and postdocs, and even Assistant Professors can blog to their hearts content and make a couple of hundred dollars each month while waiting for the results from experiments that may be incubating. However, after reviewing the content and quality of some of the so-called blogs at ScienceBlogs, I respectfully declined Seed Media’s offer to come aboard.

Unbeknownst to me, a couple of months ago a group of 20 or more bloggers “angrily parted ways with ScienceBlogs because is started running Food Frontiers a nutrition blog that PepsiCo paid to have on the site” wrote Ms Heffernan. Also, she noted, “In farewell posts the bloggers charged that the advertorial was deceptive and undermined the purpose of the collective.” According to the article, Seed Media Group quickly removed the “tainted blog.” Unfortunately, the damage had been done and the action wasn’t sufficient to prevent other bloggers from leaving.

Unfortunately, my past experiences and “run ins” with several ScienceBlogs bloggers (“On Becoming a Domestic and Laboratory Goddess” and GrrlScientist, on Living the Scientific Life (Scientist, Interrupted) were extremely unpleasant, humiliating and unprofessional. After reading Ms Heffernan’s piece on the often caustic, offensive and inappropriate remarks made by many of the bloggers who write for ScienceBlogs I felt vindicated in my assessment of the quality and veracity of the writing at the collective. To that end, she wrote “And while I found interesting stuff here and there, I also discovered that ScienceBlogs has become preoccupied with trivia, name-calling and saber rattling. Maybe that’s why the ScienceBlogs ship started to sink.”

 While I think ScienceBlogs is a great idea and has merit, the people who run the site have failed to realize that they cannot allow scientists to say and publish whatever they want. Unfortunately, many of these well-educated and supposedly erudite scientists have inadequate social skills, over-sized egos and the notion that the freedom of speech gives them permission to say whatever they like no matter how offensive or odious it may be.

However, what I think is even more egregious than the offensive comments and slurs against people was the holier-than-thou attitude adopted by many of the bloggers who left Science Blogs because the Food Frontier Blog was sponsored by PepsiCo. After all, how could ScienceBlogs management allow a corporate entity to sponsor a blog and possibly denigrate and call into question the science discussed by other bloggers? To that end, I bet many of the defecting bloggers wouldn’t scoff at the opportunity to get research grant monies from a company interested in their research. In fact, it would be interesting to see how many of the bloggers at ScienceBlogs have research contracts and agreements with pharmaceutical, biotechnology and medical devices companies.

I actually feel bad for the Seed Media Group because the company is run by a bunch of good guys who are trying to do the right thing. That is, discussing and promoting science in the blogosphere with the hope of improving the public understanding of science and technology. Maybe it was time for the bloggers who left to go. There will be other bloggers to take their places. For the foreseeable future, BioJobBlog will remain independent.  However, if ScienceBlogs wants to make me an offer I can’t refuse; than I am all ears!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Blogging!!!!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) sent a warning letter on July 29 to Novartis admonishing the company for placing a Facebook Share widget on a website promoting the use of Tasigna a treatment for chronic myeloid leukemia. An excerpt from the warning letter is as follows:

"This website contains a “Facebook Share” social media widget1 that generates Novartis-created information for Tasigna that can be shared with Facebook users (i.e., “shared content”). The shared content is misleading because it makes representations about the efficacy of Tasigna but fails to communicate any risk information associated with the use of this drug. In addition, the shared content inadequately communicates Tasigna’s FDA-approved indication and implies superiority over other products".

Further according to the agency

“Facebook Share is a way for users of Facebook to share articles, pages, video, or flash content of a site with other Facebook users. Over two billion pieces of content are shared each week through Facebook. With two clicks, visitors to a website can share any page of that website through Facebook by generating a link to the page, along with a thumbnail image and a brief description (i.e., “shared content”) that will appear on the users’ profiles and, depending on privacy settings, in the home page stream of all of the users’ friends. Each time a link is shared by one user, potentially hundreds of new people may see and/or click through on the link.”

Novartis removed the widget as instructed in the letter by the agency. However, millions of people likely clicked the widget and received inappropriate information about Tasigna. The placement of a share widget on the Tasigna website is shocking because Novartis is not a newcomer to social media and the agency is in the process of formulating guidelines for the use of social media for promotional purposes. The recent Novartis brouhaha suggests that once again a big  pharma company is playing the tried and tested cat and mouse game with the agency to see how far they can push the limits before getting “spanked.” 

Perhaps big pharma companies that are interested in using social media for promotional purposes ought to study Novo Nordisk’s Race for the Cure Twitter campaign that is being used  to promote its insulin products. Unlike Novartis, Novo was very careful to work within established regulatory guidelines that guide print and broadcast media to create the Twitter campaign. To date, FDA has not sent Novo any warning letters about the campaign which appears to be wildly successful.

Hat tip to Ed at the Pharmalot Blog

Until next time…

Good Luck and Good Tweeting!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

While Pfizer has rapidly elevated its standing in life sciences social media circles, the announcement today that it is creating a “social media channel” on SlideShare suggests that the company may be over thinking its social media strategy. I have nothing against SlideShare (I even have some of my own presentations on the site) but SlideShare isn’t exactly a “household name” in social media circles. And, IMHO it isn’t exactly the most flexible or interactive social media platform available today. 

Ray Kerins Pfizer’s Vice President for External Affairs and Worldwide Communication proclaimed in as statement prepared for the channel’s launch: 

"This channel offers an integrated social media experience, delivering a variety of content -- presentations, video, blog posts -- via the largest online resource for sharing presentations.”We’re pleased to be the first company in a regulated industry to create a custom channel on SlideShare." 

Its launch was announced today at the 6th Annual PR & Communications ExL Pharma Summit being held this week at Pfizer’s New York world headquarters. After learning about the launch I visited the “channel” to have a peek.

Expecting a treasure drove of Pfizer blog posts, videos and other content I was sadly disappointed to find only a handful of PowerPoint presentations about Pfizer’s finances and quarterly results at the site (there were no blog posts, no videos, no followers and no tweets as promised). Also, it appears that the comments and wall section are currently disabled (I logged into my SlideShare account and was still unable to comment on the Pfizer site although @skypen managed to post a comment there). Although Pfizer may think it is leading the pharmaceutical social media vanguard, the launch of its SlideShare channel has already violated one of the basic tenets of social media— no over promising. And, for now, it appears that the Pfizer channel has been set up as a broadcast medium rather than an interactive one—another big no-no in social media circles. 

Maybe I expected too much of Pfizer (after hearing Ray talk at several social media conferences) and I am being too critical. But, launching a social media channel devoid of content and interactive feature is no longer de rigueur on the social web.  If this is what the world’s largest, and possibly one of the most social-media savvy, pharmaceutical companies has to offer, then we may be in for a long and bumpy social media ride in the life sciences industry!!!! 

Until next time... 

Good Luck and Good Viewing!!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

An article in today’s New York Times business section loudly proclaimed that the number of people using Facebook had topped 500 million. Further, according to the article: “The company has grown at a meteoric pace, doubling in size from a year ago and each month, more than 30 billion photographs, links to Web sites and news articles are shared through the site, and its members spend roughly 700 billion minutes there.”  

While these statistics are mind boggling and represent an incredible business opportunity for any company, life sciences companies including most major pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies have largely shunned Facebook. In a post earlier this week on EyeonFDA, its author, Mark Senak rightly noted that:

 “When social media began to ebb from a media pathway for individuals to connect, to one where institutions and industry began to employ social media as a means of communicating with their constituencies Facebook has become an extremely important referral source - a driver of traffic - to Web pages.” Despite this, “the pharmaceutical industry, as a highly regulated industry, has lagged behind other sectors.”

The reasons for pharma’s reluctance to use social media to engage stakeholders are numerous. The most common ones offered include the lack of regulations guiding the use of social media and its possible effects on adverse event reporting for approved medicines. However, the lack of regulatory guidance and consequences for adverse event reporting didn’t prevent life sciences companies from building branded product websites, sponsoring patient communities or investing in social networks for physicians. Therefore, it is unlikely that the lack of regulatory guidance and fears of overwhelming adverse event reporting aren’t responsible for pharma’s reluctance to embrace social media. I suspect that the real reasons may have more to do with increasing transparency surrounding clinical testing, drug approvals and drug pricing and reimbursement. But, I digress....

Interestingly, despite the lack of regulatory guidance and concerns over adverse event reporting, some pharmaceutical companies have chosen to boldly go where no other life sciences companies have gone before on Facebook.  According to Mark, the following companies have created corporate or disease/cause-related fan pages on Facebook:

1. Labs Are Vital sponsored by Abbott Laboratories
2. AstraZeneca US Community Connections
3. AstraZenecaCareers
4. Bayer Karriere
5. Bayer Sustainability
6. Johnson & Johnson Network
7. Nursing Notes by Johnson & Johnson
8. Pfizer

While the number of person who are fans of these pages are minute (as compared with the total number of Facebook users) they likely represent highly committed and focused groups of user—any pharmaceutical marketer’s dream! Although Facebook still subscribes to the notion that “bigger is better, niche networking and social media sites are growing in popularity. This is because these sites may give marketers and advertisers a “bigger bang for their buck” as compared with larger, more unfocused and disparate user communities. In other words, penetration and uptake rates are likely to greater in focused niche populations as compared with the general population at large.

I have long contended that social media tools can be used for other than promotional purposes in the life sciences industry. To that end, the use of social media for clinical trial patient recruitment and retention is rapidly expanding and there are signs that pharmaceutical companies have finally recognized the power of social media for recruiting purposes e.g. AstraZenecaCareers .  

I have no doubt that the life science industry will eventually recognize the utility power of social media. It is no longer a question of “if” but rather ‘when” for social media and the life sciences industry?

Until next time...

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

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

There is no question that video is taking the Internet by storm and is quickly replacing the written word as a means of communication. Despite the obvious business opportunities offered by videos, most big pharma companies have failed to jump on the video bandwagon. As always, there are exceptions to the status quo and a handful of life sciences companies most notably Johnson & Johnson, have been experimenting with video over the past few years.

According to Mark Senak, the unofficial life sciences company video archivist and author of the always insightful EyeonFDA blog, there are presently about 15 companies that have channels on YouTube; the largest video sharing website on the Internet. Previously, Mark was able to find 10 or so active companies on the YouTube website. Despite this modest increase, Mark notes that most pharma YouTube channels are not regularly maintained and suffer from lack of original content. 

There is no question that video is expensive to make if it is done commercially. However, Ken Grant at Analtech, a small chromatography company in Delaware, who has successfully used video to drive and improve business outcomes, contends that a low cost Flip video camera or equivalent is sufficient to get the job done! 

I suspect that big pharma may be waiting for FDA to weigh in on the use of social media for promotional purposes before it allocates any resources for video production. However, as I have stated many times before, social media can be used in many other ways (besides for promotional purposes) to meet business objectives and maintain corporate brand integrity. Until pharma marketers and brand managers recognize this, social media and pharma will be a moot point.

Until next time...

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

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Mary Canady who writes the Comprendia Blog and helps to manage the San Diego Biotechnology Network has crafted a number of useful social media lists for scientists and others who work in the life sciences industry. 

Videos are de rigueur and you can find a plethora of science video websites on Mary’s comprehensive list (almost, she forgot BioCrowd). 

Many life sciences and technology companies are experimenting with social media; primarily by writing corporate blogs. Check out Mary’s list of corporate life sciences bloggers to find out what they are thinking and blogging about. 

Finally, wikis are growing in influence and importance in the life sciences. There are a number of well crafted sciences wikis out there that may be useful. Click here to see the list.

Hat tip to Mary!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

The differences between the Millennial (born 1980ish-2000) and Baby Boomers (born 1947-1966) generations are noticeable and stark. To that end, the differences between these two generational groups have been the subject of many articles and many talk radio shows (my friend  fellow boomer and host of the always amusing The Recruiting Animal Show loves the get me “going” on the topic).

Before I legitimately entered the Web 2.0 world several years ago, I thought the planet was in serious jeopardy (how boomer-centric of me!). While Millennials aka GenY have their own problems —just like me and my fellow boomers —I believe that their sense of community, connectivity and transparency, may, in the end, save a world that is being run into the ground. That said there is an interesting article in the Sunday New York Times business section written by Michael Costonis and Rob Salkowitz that clearly delineates the differences between Millennials and status-quo boomers; and why it is important for boomers to co-exist rather than resist Millennial trends in the workplace. The authors describe Millennials this way:

“Young workers grew up in a digital culture distinguished by near-immediate sharing of information. They tend to be collaborative and team-oriented, even when they aren’t technology experts. They grew up multitasking and don’t see the sharp delineations between “work” and “leisure” that previous generations did. Millennials often prize freedom, innovation and speed over security and stability. They seek flexibility in work schedules and work locations.

Most of all, young workers take access to technology for granted — as a way to get information, keep track of friends, schedule activities and do their work. And, of course, this access has now gone mobile, via wireless connections and smartphones.

Newer technology also creates a more networked and less hierarchical workplace. Work is distributed across more people in more places, with virtual teams communicating more or less instantly.”

Not a bad set of characteristics and skill sets, if leveraged correctly, may actually improve workplace efficiency and productivity and possibly reduce costs!

We boomers like to think of ourselves as agents of change. While this may have been true in the ‘60s and ‘70s, it is no longer the case—once a group becomes the so-called establishment there is no impetus or inducement to change the status quo. And, as many boomers have learned, change can be difficult and nobody really likes it! 

With this in mind, it makes sense for boomers to tap into their inner, ancient desires for change and accommodate, rather than resist, workplace changes being insisted upon by millennial hires. After all, they will be running the world in the next decade or so and if we aging boomers want to be taken care of and treated well, then a little support and understand may go a long way! And, as we used to say back in the tumultuous ‘60s: “Try it; you’ll like it!”

Until next time...

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

Addendum: I was taken to task by a GenXer who claimed that, in typically Baby-boomer style I tried to butt in on GenX by asserting that the Boomer generation extended until 1966. While some experts claim that GenX may have begun as early as 1961 others do not and contend that it began in earnest in the West in 1966.  In any event, Baby Boomers and GenXers are aging and will ultimately have to cede control to the Millennials.  But hey, why not split a few hairs (even if many of us have few hairs left to do that!)

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (3)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

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!!!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Pharmaceutical giant GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) and MedTrust Online, an online oncology information site announced the development of CancerTrials App, the first free geo-locating oncology clinical trials application for the Apple iPhone and iPad platforms.

According to a press release, oncologists can easily find and share information about experimental therapies in clinical trials with their patients. CancerTrials App provides a quick search menu based on 12 common cancers and more advanced features that refine searches based on criteria such as gender, age, trial status and more. Once relevant clinical trials are found, results can be mapped relative to the location of the iPhone or iPad running the application. These features should help oncologists connect patients to appropriate regional and local clinical trials for which they may be eligible. Obviously, the app will help to bolster clinical trial enrollment in the oncology space.

While not a full blow geo-based social media platform like FourSquare,the Cancer Trials app is a step in the right direction and demonstrates the power of mobile medical applications and the potential of social media to improve clinical drug development. 

CancerTrials App for the iPhone and iPad is the first release of the application that connects to MedTrust Online's proprietary databases of oncology information. Other apps for RIM's BlackBerry and Google's Android operating systems will be released over the next several months.

Hat tip to GSK which has boldly gone where no other pharma company has gone before!

Until next time....

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Last week I attended the Advanced Learning Institute’s conference on social media and pharma. During several question and answer periods, I raised the idea about using social medial tools to improve adverse effects (AE) reporting and post marketing drug surveillance activities. While there was a lot of head nodding suggesting that many of the conference attendees agreed with the points I was making, the conversation about social media and AE reporting was extremely muted. I suspect that most pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies don’t want to discuss the topic until the US Food and Drug Administration issues its mythical regulatory guidance on the use of social media for promotional and other purposes some time next year (?).

John Mack aka Pharmaguy is an ardent supporter (like me) of the use of social media for AE reporting. John was at the meeting and he mentioned that the next day he would be giving a talk on that topic to the World Drug Safety Congress in Washington, DC. Conveniently, he posted a copy of the talk to Slideshare and his blog, Pharma Marketing Blog before his talk.

John’s ideas and insights into the use of social media tools for AE reporting are spot on (and consistent with mine of course!). I highly recommend that those of you who are interested in learning more about this topic take a look at the presentation; it is very informative and quite well done.

It is anybody’s guess at this point whether or not pharma will embrace social media and use it for more than promotional and marketing purposes. However, there is a growing body of evidence which suggests that pharma is beginning to realize that they can no longer fight the pressure from its stakeholders to embrace social media.

Stay tuned for late-breaking social media and pharma news!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Tweeting, Blogging, Videoing etc!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

About a year ago I posted an article to BioJobBlog that suggested that social media can be leveraged to improve clinical trial recruitment to test investigational new drug candidates. Yesterday, Mark Senak, author of the EyeonFDA posted an article which suggested that the use of video on YouTube and other video-viewing sites makes complete sense to recruit prospective participants for human clinical trials. Here are some of Mark’s thoughts on the topic:

“The reasons I think video is a good way to expose people to learning about clinical trials are multiple. First, it allows me as a prospective clinical trial participant to learn about a clinical trial when I want to learn about it and where I want to learn about it - a hallmark of social media.  Second, it is private - I can learn from a video that can be developed to address a wide range of issues - issues that I might not be so comfortable addressing with a live person.  Thirdly, and perhaps most importantly, I learn about the clinical trials perhaps from someone on a video who is very much like me.  He can be someone with my condition - someone who has gone through a trial, and talk about how his concerns were addressed, what his fears were and what the benefits of participation were.  That, I think, is a much more convincing way to learn about a trial than an ad in a newspaper or even a discussion with a clinical person.  Video can't replace the medical professional, but it sure can get my interest and perhaps trust to make recruitment much easier.”

While the industry’s use of social media for this purpose is not quite there yet, there are some signs that pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies may be trending in that direction. First, a growing number of clinical research organizations (CROs) which help companies plan and manage clinical studies are already using social media tools to recruit prospective clinical trials participants. Second, as Mark reported yesterday, Pfizer launched a YouTube channel called PfizerClinicalTeam last July which presumably would bolster clinical trial recruitment. Unfortunately, as Mark pointed, its most recent video was posted in April, 2010, regarding a new study on schizophrenia. Don’t be surprised if other companies launch social media-focused clinical trials recruitment campaigns in the not too distant future. Like Mark, I believe that social media tools are ideal for this purpose!

In other news, Pfizer, a late entrant to the fledgling pharmaceutical social media space, is showing signs that it is beginning to embrace the social media web. Yesterday, Pfizer and Epocrates announced a collaboration to create an application for the iPhone that gives healthcare providers mobile access to the Pfizer Medical Information Group to obtain medical and science information about Pfizer products or to report adverse events. According to Pfizer, it is creating the app to: “enable easy, direct access to its Medical Information services, via the Epocrates channel, in an effort to enhance the safe and effective use of its medicines, and help improve the quality of patient care.”

Direct access to medical information via mobile devices is growing in popularity among physicians and other healthcare providers because it enables them to get answers on the go without wasting time to fire up a laptop or find a tethered computer to use outside of the clinic.

Despite assertions to the contrary by most pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, social media tools are ideal vehicles for adverse event reporting and post market drug surveillance activities. Pfizer’s creation of a mobile medical information app coupled with the launch last week of a joint US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and National Institutes of Health drug safety portal called Safety Reporting Portal (original eh?) suggest that the use of social media tools for online adverse event reporting and drug safety purposes is not too far off. Let’s see what develops over the next year or so after FDA issues regulatory guidance on the use of social media in the life sciences industry.

Until next time...

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

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (4)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

I want to state at the onset of this post that I am an ardent supporter of online patient communities because I believe that the exchange of information between people who suffer from the same or similar medical conditions is vital to their health and well being. Further, I believe that social media will force physicians, the medical community and the US healthcare system to become more transparent, open and interactive. That being said, in this past Sunday’s New York Times, Natasha Singer wrote an extremely revealing article about some possible, unforeseen “side effects” associated with membership in online patient communities.

The reason why these online communities exist is for patients to commiserate with one another and exchange personal stories and medical information. While personal stories may be emotionally satisfying for patients, it is their medical information and demographic data that is extremely valuable to drug makers. To that end, many online patient communities inform their members that they reserve the right to share information and data for research purposes. And many of them do!

To be clear, I am not suggesting that the people who create or manage online patient communities have avaricious, nefarious or otherwise unsavory ulterior motives for the medical and patient demographic data that they collect. However, these communities need to generate revenue in order to stay in business and drug makers are willing to pay for access to it.

According to Singer, the popular PatientsLikeMe community admits that it sells health and medical data gathered from member profiles (but with certain identifying information removed) to pharmaceutical companies and others for scientific and marketing research purposes. Further, a large number of unbranded “disease awareness” pages have recently begun to appear on Facebook and YouTube. In her article, Singer contends that “drug companies may pay people to moderate patient forums [in the community] or give testimonials but might not prominently display that fact to participants. Other sites collect consumer health data to help drug makers’ aim at specific kinds of consumers, using psychological cues.” At a medical communications meeting that I attended several years ago, a MySpace sales rep freely admitted to me that it allow pharmaceutical companies to mine profile data in order to develop targeted marketing campaigns. Is Facebook next?

Finally, while the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) restricts the way health care providers use and disseminate patients’ information, consumer health websites and online patient communities aren’t subject to its privacy provisions. In other words, there are no regulations guiding the privacy and use of medical information and data collected using social media tools! Essentially, this means that the persons who run online patient communities can do pretty much whatever they like with the medical and personal information that they collect!

As I stated at the beginning of the post, I am a social media enthusiast who subscribes to the notion that if used correctly, social media can help to better inform and improve the lives of people suffering from various disease. That said, I also believe that people who choose to participate in online communities MUST be fully informed about the potential uses of the personal information and data that they contribute. Until the Food and Drug Administration provides some regulatory guidance on the use social media to collect and disseminate medical information patients will be at the mercy of the entities that run online patient communities. Let’s hope that they see fit to “do the right thing.”

Until next time...

Good Luck and Be Careful What You Say Out There!!!!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (2)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

We scientists tend to be a serious bunch who often hard on difficult projects with lofty goals and expectations. However, like most other people, many of us have well developed senses of humor and enjoy a good laugh from time to time.

While working on my recent post on pharma and social media, I came across a post on Wendy Blackburn's blog, epharma Rx, that showcased a clever and well-crafted video created by her agency InTouchSolutions to help pharma companies overcome fears about social media.  I think BioJobBlog readers will enjoy it because it uses scientific principles (presumably understood by life sciences companies employees) to poke fun and educate pharma executives about social media 

Hat tip to Wendy and the InTouchSolutions Team

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Viewing!!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Earlier this week, I attended Advanced Learning Institute’s (ALI) conference “Social Media and Pharma” that was held in Princeton, NJ. The conference was chaired and expertly moderated by Bill Evans, a Senior Vice President and Partner, Digital at Fleishman Hillard. Bill’s insights and command of the social media space were outstanding and helped to keep the conference moving forward and always on point (he also knows a lot about selling old iPhone on EBay—thanks Bill). 

All of the talks that I attended were outstanding and I have to say that the conference was one of the best organized and most focused conferences on the topic of social media and pharma that I attended to date! This is because Bill, a former technology turned business guy, organized the meeting around a conversational “how to” theme rather than allow presenters to talk about their cool Facebook pages, Twitter feeds and blogs. Instead, he asked presenters to share with conference participants their ideas, strategies and experiences associated with implementation of their social media campaigns and programs. 

Two of my favorite presentations were delivered by pharma companies; Pfizer and Novo Nordisk. This was somewhat surprising because historically many pharma companies had to be reluctantly forced into the social media fracas.

The Pfizer presentation, “A Common Sense Approach for Integrating Social Media into Your Traditional Communications and Marketing Plans: A Roadmap for Success” was skillfully delivered by Paul Dyer from WCG (the agency that worked with Pfizer on its social media campaign) and Pfizer’s Kate Bird. Paul, who previously worked with social media in the consumer product industry, offered more facts and statistics that I ever knew existed for social media. With this as a backdrop, Kate went on to describe how Pfizer, a late entrant to the social media scene, leveraged this information to create one of the better social media campaigns launched to date by a pharmaceutical company.

The Novo Nordisk presentation, “How to Use Twitter to Deliver Measurable Results For Your Organization” was delivered by Lois Kotkoskie and Ambre Morley was a veritable road map on how to use Twitter to delivered branded messages about pharmaceutical products. For those of you who may not know, Novo Nordisk is the only company to date that has delivered a so-called “branded pharmaceutical tweet” in the Twitterverse. The now infamous tweet about Novo’s diabetes product Levemir s was delivered by race car driver and Novo spokesperson Charlie Kimball.

Despite this bold and unprecedented foray into branded pharmaceutical tweets, Novo hasn’t yet run afoul of regulators at the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) This is because Ambre, who is a marketing and PR professional, understood early on in the process, that in order to succeed and stay off of FDA’s radar, she would have to work closely her company’s regulatory affairs department. This is where Lois came in; she is a bona fide pharmaceutical regulatory affairs expert who in addition to her understanding of the arcane regulations guiding pharmaceutical advertising, has a well-developed sense of humor (frequently absent in pharmaceutical regulators) and is seemingly less risk-adverse than a majority of her peers.

It was easy to see that Ambre and Lois work very well together (sometimes I thought I was watching an Abbott and Costello comedy routine). Undoubtedly this is the likely reason why Novo’s diabetes-focused Twitter campaign was so well crafted, executed and in the end, successful. The take away lesson from the Novo experience is that pharma marketing and communication professionals interested in designing and implementing regulatory-compliant social media campaigns must include legal and regulatory representatives in the discussion.

Honorable mentions go to the presentations offered by Ken Rashbaum, Doug Levy and Peter Pitts who mainly talked about some of the legal, regulatory and privacy concerns voiced by pharmaceutical companies about the use of social media. An important issue that nobody at the meeting was prepared to discuss was the possible use of social media for pharmaceutical adverse event (AE) reporting. Generally speaking, conference participants were reticent to address this issue because most thought it would be difficult to have meaningful discussion in the absence of any regulatory guidance on this topic.

As many of you may know, the FDA held public hearings on the use of social media for various purposes in the life sciences industry late last fall. At present, it isn’t clear when the agency will issue that much anticipated guidance.

This past week’s “Social Media and Pharma” conference was the second event produced by ALI on this topic. Based on the attendance and enthusiastic response to the meeting, I suspect that ALI may be planning future events on social media and pharma. If this proves to be the case, then I highly recommend that you attend one or more of them!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Tweeting!!!!!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

There is ample anecdotal evidence to suggest that using social media tools like Twitter, LinkedIn and Facebook may help to improve your chances of landing a new job. For example, a recent article that appeared in Time Magazine recounts the story of an individual who lost and subsequently found a job in 11 days using a job search strategy based exclusively on social media. While social media tools are still evolving, social media has become part of the fabric of every day modern life. Therefore, it makes sense that social media may be useful when using it to find a job. 

In previous posts on this blog, I recommended using a variety of social media strategies when conducting a job search. However, like any other technology tools, if social media is not not used or managed correctly it may backfire and give you less than anticipated results. To that end, the folks over at Online Degree send me a post entitled “The 10 Worst Social Media Mistakes that Will Prevent You from Landing a Job.” 

Although some of the tips and ideas may be obvious to some, many jobseekers have little or no understanding of what is acceptable when conducting a social media or traditional job search. I highly recommend that you heed the advice offered here--it may very well make a difference between gainful employment and living at home with your parents or relatives!

1. Don’t Be That Guy : We all have at least one social media friend who shares him or herself too much. Things like realtors putting up each new listing, every sale a business has, or constant reminders on the same event can be as off putting to an employer as it is to a friend. If using your social media account to promote your work, be thoughtful of other people’s time. Chris Brogan has an excellent rule of one promotional update for every 15 casual ones. Check out his blog for more useful moves.

2. Use it or Lose It : Twitter and other sites are essentially a blank canvas. Don’t let them go to waste by using the same backgrounds and graphics as anyone else. Use the opportunity to showcase photos, art, events, logos, and anything else that will make you stand out. Mashable has a great guide on how and why to create a custom Twitter background. For inspiration, click here to see many successful attempts at creating memorable, yet simple backgrounds.

3. You Can Have Too Many Friends : Too many friends and followers actually can be a bad thing. While real people with real accounts are a plus, the more popular an application becomes, the more likely it is to be subject to hacking. Both Facebook and Twitter have had troubles with phishing such as Zombie and Twply. Gullibility does not make you attractive to an employer. Better to have 100 actual friends/followers, than 200 phony ones, both in social media and IRL.

4. Don’t Down the Updates : So you just got a new gadget and it rocks? Or was the sushi overpriced and stale? Did your kid just do the cutest thing? Now think about if a potential employer wants to read every detail about the above. While short, incisive updates are appreciated and even admired, they can also do the opposite. Have a look at this list to see the worst status updates and delete them before they prevent you from landing a job.

5. Sir Mix-A-Little : With social media becoming more and more popular, you likely have more than one account. While there is nothing wrong with having a Facebook, Twitter, and LinkedIn account all at once, mixing them can be a problem. In an amazingly well thought out article, Nicky Jameson discusses the pitfalls of mixing social media business and pleasure. If still unsure, check out #10 on this list.

6. Too Little of a Good Thing : Now that you have social media account and know how not to update too much, don’t go the other route. Too few updates can show lack of commitment and general spazziness. Updates that come once a month, or even once a week, can be too few. However, with loads to do and little time to do it in, updates can be challenging. Visit this link to get a guide to FeedMyTwitter. It can auto post pre-written updates on the date, category, and more of your choosing.

7. Drive a Manual : Automatic DM’s may be useful to some people when used correctly, but a misstep can hurt those looking to avoid mistakes. If a prospective employer has the courtesy to follow or friend you, thank them properly. A generic “thank you" is just as insulting as it sounds. Write one yourself, make it personal, and stand out just a little more. This site shows you how to disable Auto DM on Twitter.

8. Spelling Isn’t Just for Bees : Yes, its social media and, yes, there is a certain sense of informality. However, especially if going for a writing or editing job, any spelling or grammar mistake can prevent you from landing it. If your browser has a spell check, use it. Even if it does, don’t turn the spell check in your noggin off even if you’re writing about your favorite restaurant. This article from Scrawlbug lists eight stupid spelling mistakes that happen more often than you think.

9. Spam is for Canned Meat : If someone does check your account, an overload of spam cannot only be off-putting; it can also show that you have little technical knowledge. A potential boss can only assume that you will behave the same and subject the whole office to lottery scams and the like. To prevent from making this social media mistake that will prevent you from landing a job, learn the in’s and out’s of your account. This site is entirely devoted to stopping spam on Twitter.

10. You Got to Keep ‘Em Separated : Love your Facebook, Twitter, etc. accounts and will censor them for no one? Go for it. That’s one of the reasons why the internet invented multiple accounts. Simply use one for all of the professional stuff with your proper name, pictures, messages, and such. All the intimate stuff can appear on another account under the nickname of your choice. Visit this link to see a quick and easy way to set up two accounts on the same computer with no problem.

Hat tip to Onlinedegree.net.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting on Twitter and Facebook

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Despite claims of its imminent demise, it appears that social media and all of its trappings are being embraced by the masses. According to a report issued last week by CTIA, the wireless industry association, the amount of data, in text, music e-mail and other activities surpassed voice calls on mobile devices in 2009 (this explains why you cannot purchase 95 per cent of Verizon Wireless phones without a mandatory $9.99 per month data plan).

While there is little difference between the number of cell phone subscribers in 2009 and 2010, the number of users going online is up across all Web categories. Most notably, visitors to social networking sites like Facebook, Twitter and Four Square increased 78 percent. However, a troubling trend is that 46 per cent more users are visiting reference sites like Answer.com or Wikipedia for information. Although these sites are excellent resources, it isn’t clear whether or not all entries have been adequately researched and thoroughly vetted.

The meteoric rise of social media over the past five years has caused many e analysts and media pundits to suggest that the frenzy may be abating and the death of social media may be near. However, the beauty of Web 2.0 as it metamorphoses into Web 3.0 (are we there yet?) is that social media tools and their acceptance are extremely unpredictable. Who would have thought two years ago that Twitter, the upstart microblogging platform would be currently challenging Facebook for social media supremacy. Another social media platform to watch is Foursquare. While I don’t “get” the popularity of Foursquare, I also didn’t get Twitter until I started regularly using it!

Finally, as Mark Twain wrote many years ago after reading his obituary in a newspaper “"The reports of my death are greatly exaggerated” so too are the premature assertions that social media may be dead.

Until next time…

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

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

The Advanced Learning Institute will be hosting a conference entitle Social Media for Pharma on May 24 & 25, 2010 at the Hyatt Hotel in Princeton, NJ. Presenters include representatives from AstraZeneca, Johnson & Johnson, Novartis, Sanofi-Aventis, NovoNordisk, Daiichi Sankyo, Lundbeck, Porter Novelli, the National Organization for Rare Diseases and many others. 

Topics to be covered include:

• Developing a social media strategy that works for your organization
• Update on regulatory guidance for social media
• Managing on going regulatory challenges for social media
• Building a business case and demonstrating ROI for social media platforms
• Creating a stronger sense of community and brand recognition using social media
• Monitoring customer feedback and satisfaction
• Determine the right mix of social media for your organization
• Latest innovations in social media
• Using twitter to turn your employees into stakeholders into brand ambassadors

and much more!

An agenda for the meeting can be found here. Mention BioJobBlog or BioCrowd and get $200 off the registration fee. For more information please contact melissa@aliconferences.com

I hope to see you at the meeting…it ought to be a good one!!!!!!!!!!

Until next time..

Good Luck and Good Tweeting, Blogging, Podcasting etc etc!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

In case you haven’t heard, the Business Development Institute is hosting its Second Annual Social Communications and Healthcare event next Tuesday, May 11, 2010 at the The Graduate Center of The City University of New York in midtown Manhattan, New York City. 

The meeting, which starts at 8:30 AM and continues until 1:00 PM, will consist of a serious of plenary talks followed by moderated round table discussions on a variety of social media and healthcare-related topics. Yours truly will be leading a roundtable discussion on non-promotional uses of social media in the life sciences industry.

Agenda

For more information, including registration, please click here to visit the event website. Or contact Steve Etzler at setzler@bdionline.com or 212-765-8045.

BioJobBlog readers can use promo code BC for a discounted rate of $155.

I hope to see you at next week's meeting!!!!

Until next time …

Good Luck and Good Tweeting!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

I started writing BioJobBlog about three years ago mainly to express my personal views on a variety of topics ranging from science education and career development to happenings in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries. At the time, blogging was a relatively new phenomenon (especially in the life sciences space) and I had no idea whether or not anybody would really care about what I thought or had to say. 

Apparently, some people do—last week the number of visitors to BioJobBlog quietly surpassed the 1,000,000 unique visitor mark. I say quietly because I had been assiduously watching my stats (like most bloggers) over the past few months to craft a post as soon as I surpassed the mark. Ironically, I inadvertently took my “eye off the ball” and unknowingly passed the mark earlier this week by about 15,000 page views. Go figure.

I want to thank everybody who reads BioJobBlog and finds my post useful. I know that at times I can be vitriolic and pedantic; but I am who I am and I guess you have to take the bad with the good—or not!

For those of you who may not know, BioJobBlog is self-funded (I have no sponsors or paid advertisers). Because of this, I get to say what I want, when I want and how I want to say it. Hopefully, my financial situation will remain stable so that I can continue to self finance the blog and “tell it the way it is” (or at least how I SEE it).

Finally, I want to thank the readers who send me comments and notes about my posts and the blog in general. Generally, they are helpful, incisive and thought provoking and provide fodder for new posts. With this in mind, if anyone is interested in appearing as a guest blogger at BioJobBlog, please don’t hesitate to contact me! While blogging is often fun and even addictive, it can become extremely tedious and  labor intensive at times.

Until next time…

Good Luck and Good Reading!!!!!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Cellectics, SA, a French genomic engineering and genetic surgery company is a great example of a biotechnology company that “gets” social media. 

The person, who manages the company’s Twitter account, posted a video on YouTube called a “ A Day at Cellectics. While not quite Avatar, it is short, fun to watch and if nothing else, it shows prospective employees that Cellectics may be a cool place to work! 

While I can’t vouch for Cellectics’ science, it is a company that knows how to leverage social media for better business outcomes! 

Until next time…

Good Luck and Good Tweeting!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Virologist and BioCrowd co-founder Vincent Racaniello, PhD recently gave a talk at the Spring 2010 meeting of the Society for General Microbiology in Edinburgh, Scotland.

The talk, entitled ‘Social Media in Microbiology Education and Research’ reviewed how Professor Racaniello uses blogging, podcasting, and other social media tools to teach the public about viruses.

To learn more about Vincent and how he uses social media to increase the publics’ awareness about viruses and other infectious agents, please visit the BioCrowd website.

Until next time…

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

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

By now, most of you have heard at some point or another that networking is critical when it come to trying to land a job. Unfortunately, networking is not an inherited genetic trait and it takes a fair amount of skill (some say art) to develop and excel at it! To make matters worse, most scientists are told and frequently reminded that networking for career advancement is equivalent to shameless self promotion and that “good scientists” generally refrain from doing it. Consequently, most scientists are not good at networking and in some cases shamefully inept.

The advent of social networking sites like BioCrowd, Facebook and others provides an opportunity for scientists to overcome their fear or guilt about networking. More importantly it provides a “safe haven” for scientists who want to avoid the anxiety and pressures of face-to-face networking at live events. While online networking may be a surrogate or substitute for the real thing, if leveraged correctly, it can be used to find and land a job or advance a career. 

Surprisingly, the use of social networking by life scientists lags behind that of the general public. After all, many life scientists pride themselves as being on the cutting edge or part of the vanguard pushing new technologies that can be used to “push back the frontiers of science.” Nevertheless, social media and online networking sites have become routine parts of most job searches and both are used by employers and prospective employees alike. To that end, I crafted a Powerpoint presentations that describes the “dos and don’ts” of social media for job searches and career advancement. 

Until next time…

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

We previously announced that BioCrowd, an online bioprofessional networking site, was going to launch a new feature which allows members to upload any type of multimedia files ranging from videos to podcasts to poster presentations to their profile page and the BioCrowd network. Also, members can view  videos or listen to podcasts, comment on them and  let others know whether or not you liked them. Like most other websites that support videos, we offer an embed feature that allows you to copy the code of videos that you like and post them to other website, blogs or YouTube.

We hope to run contests for best video, podcast, PowerPoint or poster presentation in the very near future. If you are already a BioCrowd member, please visit the site and upload your favorite multimedia files to the network.  For those of you who are not members yet, please drop by, check us out and join if you like!  If you have any problems or identify any bugs with the new upload feature please e-mail me.

I hope to see you at the BioCrowd!!!!

Until next time.... 

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

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Mark Senak, author of the incisive EyeonFDA blog and de facto watchdog of all things social media in the life sciences, has assiduously been tracking company and trade organization input to the docket for the Part 15 meeting on medical product promotion and the internet and social media. To date, according to Mark, the following companies and trade groups have officially submitted their comments and viewpoints to the docket                                                                                              

1. Covidien
2. Johnson & Johnson
3. Bayer Healthcare
4. Sanofi Aventis
5. AstraZeneca
6. Eli Lilly
7. Medtronic
8. Pfizer
9. Abbott
10. Novartis
11. Genentech
12. Sepracor
13. Merck
14. Medtronic
15. Biotechnology Industry Organization (BIO)
16. PhRMA
17. National Organization for Rare Disorders (NORD)

As you may recall, industry input was lacking and surprisingly absent from the public hearings held by FDA on the topic earlier this year. While news analysts and bloggers were incredulous that companies didn’t actively participate in the earlier public hearings, this behavior is typical of life sciences companies that like to do things quietly and, when possible, behind closed doors. Ironically, this lack of transparency and inclination to secrecy is the antithesis of social media. Is it any wonder then, that life sciences companies are suspicious and wary of the impact that social media may have on their ability to conduct business?

Until next time...

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

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Mark Senak, social media enthusiast and author of the EyeonFDA blog, raised the question on his blog today as to whether or not the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) ought to have a fan page on Facebook: the ever expanding, ubiquitous social media platform. He aptly points out that FDA has already created a channel on YouTube and has a twitter account. So, why not a fan page on Facebook, he asked.

While Mark and I agree on most things, I am not convinced that having an FDA fan page on Facebook would make a difference in the way in which FDA communicates with the American public. FDA is already behind on the social media curve and, as the FDA public hearings held late last year suggest, the agency is struggling with formulating regulatory guidelines for its use by drug and devices manufacturers. Might not creating a FDA fan page on Facebook be the proverbial straw that broke the camel’s (agency) back? 

Perhaps I am overreacting to the whole Facebook phenomenon and grossly under estimating the agency’s capabilities. But I simply don’t get Facebook!  At best, it is overwhelming, difficult to navigate and seemingly cluttered mindless chatter and people engaging in Mafia wars. There is no question that a fan page would increase FDA’s exposure and its “hipness quotient” but to what end? The agency already has trouble maintaining and managing its existing web assets (have you ever tried finding information at FDA.gov?). Adding a new website would simply mean more work for overworked and underpaid government employee who seemingly play by different rules than the outside world.

Don’t get me wrong. I am an avid social media enthusiast who believes that persons who engage in social media must be “all in” to be effective. Having said that, I believe that the agency would be better served if it works to improve the navigability and accessibility to information on its existing web assets. There is no question that building an agency fan page on Facebook may convince Americans that FDA gets “the whole social media thing.” But if the fan page doesn’t provide Americans with relevant and useful scientific, medical and regulatory information, then adding a FDA fan page to Facebook will do little more than increasing the heft of an already bloated social media platform whose utility and effectiveness is already beginning to wane.

In my experience, building a website or fan page is the easy part; continuing to populate the pages and sites with useful, meaningful and temporally-relevant content is the difficult part!

Hat tip to Mark for starting the conversation!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Mary Canady author of the Comprendia Blog recently analyzed the popularity (or lack thereof) of a number of social networking sites that were created for life scientists. It would seem that online social networking sites would be ideal for scientists because we are not known for our networking or social communication skills in real life. However, only a few of the more than 15 life sciences social networking sites started in the past two years are doing well based on the traffic and usage statistics cited by Mary in her post. 

While Mary’s analysis included most of the well known life science social networking sites, she failed to include BioCrowd, the networking site started by Vincent Racaniello and me. While BioCrowd does cater to life scientists, we intentionally expanded our network to include other bioprofessionals including medical writers, marketers, consultants, venture capitalists and even CEOs! After all, it takes a village to take an idea from concept to commercialization.

Hat tip to Mary for the insightful post!

Until next time...

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

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Vincent Racaniello, virologist extraordinaire and a BioCrowd co-founder is slated to appear on ABC World News this evening to discuss Rebecca Sloot’s new book entitled The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks. The book details the life of little-known Henrietta Lack whose cancerous cervical cells (subsequently called HeLa cells by the scientists who managed to cultivate and immortalize them in the laboratory), revolutionized the field of virology and changed the way viral vaccines are manufactured.

Rebecca Skloot, the author, is an award-winning science writer, and a contributing editor at Popular Science magazine; she's worked as a correspondent for the NPR show RadioLab, and PBS Nova ScienceNOW. Her writing appears in The New York Times Magazine, O: The Oprah Magazine, Discover and others. The “Immortal Life of Henrietta Lack” is her first book.

So, why is Vincent being featured on tonight’s newscast about the HeLa book? For those of you who don’t know, Vincent has spent almost 30 years unraveling the molecular mechanisms by which the polio virus causes disease. And, as many of you may know, HeLa cells are the cell line of choice to cultivate polio virus in the laboratory. In addition to cloning the polio virus receptor in HeLa cells, members of Vincent’s laboratory have elucidated the genes and their proteins responsible for the neurotrophic effects of the virus that can lead to paralysis from polio infections. Further, for those of you who may not know, Vincent, while a postdoctoral fellow in David Baltimore's laboratory, was the first to demonstrate that transfection of HeLa cells with cDNA made from polio virus genomic RNA (using the newly discovered HIV reverse transcriptase enzyme that resulted in Baltimore winning the 1975 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine) yielded infectious polio virions.

While Vincent’s findings greatly aided research to elucidate the underlying pathogenic mechanisms of the polio virus, it transformed and revolutionized the entire field of RNA virology. Prior to Vincent’s discovery, it was impossible to study the molecular biology of RNA viruses using recombinant methods because unlike DNA, there are no known RNA restriction enzymes. The ability to transcribe viral RNA into cDNA molecules that yield infection RNA viral particles permitted researchers to dissect RNA virus genomes (using recombinant DNA technology) to determine contribution of individual genes to viral pathogenesis.

Vincent, one of only a handful of virus pioneers, is now applying his considerable pioneering talents to social media because he believes that Web 2.0 tools like blogs, podcasts, videos and social networking sites can be successfully used for science education and improving the public understanding of the life sciences.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Viewing (ABC World News Tonight)!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

I Am Biotech, the Biotechnology Industry Organization’s (BIO) outreach program is trying to promote the use of social media to spread the word about the importance of biotechnology and how it has changed the world for many individuals.

BioCrowd was invited to contribute to the social media section of the website. Like us, I Am Biotech believes that social media has an important role in promoting a better public understanding of biotechnology and other aspects of the life sciences industry.

Please check us out and learn more about the value of becoming a member of the BioCrowd by clicking here.

Until next time

Good Luck and Good Surfing!!!!!!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

It’s no secret that pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies are “not in love” with social media. However, whether life sciences company like it or not, social media is beginning to affect human clinical testing with an increasing number of patients demanding access to unapproved experimental drugs to treat life-threatening illnesses. 

In a recent article that appeared in the January 15, 2010 issue of Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology News entitled “Expanded Access to Investigational New Drugs”, Natalie Douglas, CEO of UK-based Idis Pharma wrote:

"...the trend toward greater transparency of drug development pipelines and the accessibility of powerful social media tools, have led us to a more informed empowered and vocal population of patients. This, in turn, has led to increased demands for access to unapproved drugs that are in various stages of human clinical testing. “Patients can easily access information about investigational drugs via the Internet and are leveraging social media tools such as YouTube, Twitter and blog to influence companies to garner access to them” Douglas added.

This can place enormous pressure on the companies that are testing investigational new drugs because the safety and efficacy of the drug candidates has yet to be determined. Understandably, companies are loath to provide patients who don’t meet clinical trial inclusion requirements access to experimental drugs with unknown safety and efficacy characteristics. Nonetheless, if requests for access to investigational drugs are denied, social media tools can easily be used to quickly and widely publicize the denial. According to Douglas, aggressive use of social media tools by patients seeking access to investigational drugs has helped their stories make national news. This can create gargantuan regulatory and public relations problems for companies with drugs in clinical development and put them at the center of an ethical and moral firestorm—despite their best intentions to develop new drugs that eventually may help millions of patients suffering from various diseases and conditions.

Many patient advocacy groups, consumers and shareholders understand the almost limitless reach of social media and its ability to influence public opinion, discussions and trends. Whether or not drug makers are willing to use social media, many have yet to understand that they are already part of the social media conversation that is taking place daily. And, as all social media enthusiasts have realized, if you are not part of the conversation then you don’t know what is being said about you on the Internet. More importantly perhaps, is that by choosing not to participate in the conversation, companies have lost all ability to influence and manage what is being said. In other words, life sciences companies that steadfastly choose not to use social media may, paradoxically, be setting themselves up for public relations and regulatory headaches that could have easily been avoided.

While the social media frenzy may be beginning to wane, there is no question that it has changed the way people interact and influenced the way business is transacted online and in real life. Companies that insist on clinging to past business practices that are exclusive, non-interactive and designed to promote opacity are likely to lose customers and market share as 21^st century technology continues to unfold.

Hat tip to Natalie!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Tweeting!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Despite rumors of impending demise and premature death, the issues surrounding the use of social media in the life sciences industry are still alive and relevant. To that end, the Business Development Institute is sponsoring a “Healthcare Social Communications Leadership Forum Breakfasts on February 4, 2010 at New York University in Manhattan. The conference is limited to 75 attendees. While there are seats still available they are rapidly disappearing. 

Some of the topics to be discussed include:

• How to connect with consumers who are already using the internet for healthcare information?
• What are the case studies of leading brands that use internet based social strategies to achieve communications objectives?
• What are examples of social communities that demonstrate how leading healthcare brands interact, educate and provide value to consumers online?
• How to deal with regulatory and legal issues when planning and implementing social and internet based strategies
• Why real-time social media tools, such as Twitter, are gaining momentum and what's the business case to use them
• How to sell projects and prove ROI to senior management
• What are the tools, technologies, and best practices for monitoring and measuring internet based programs?

Scheduled presenters and panelists are:

1. Michael Fleming, Senior Director, Social Media, GlaxoSmithKline
2. Robert Halper, Director of Video Communication, Johnson & Johnson
3. Lance Hill, CEO, Within3
4. Ray Kerins, Vice President / Worldwide Communications, Pfizer Inc.
5. Marc Monseau, Director, Corporate Communications & Social Media, Johnson & Johnson
6. Rodney Spady, Head of Global Interactive Marketing and Web Officer, OTC Global Marketing, Novartis Consumer Health, Inc.

For more information, including registration, please click here to visit the event website. Use promo code BIOC before February 3rd for a discounted rate of $175.

See you at the meeting!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Social Networking!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

As Jonathan Richman, author of the Dose of Digital blog focused on pharmaceutical marketing aptly put it, its time to “stop talking about social media.” “To recap, in 2009 we demanded the FDA call a hearing to discuss social media…and they did! We wrote and read hundreds, if not thousands, of articles on social media. We transformed (read: hijacked) every digital marketing conference into a social media conference. We launched a ton of social media programs even if they represent a conservative start.”

While I am still an ardent social media enthusiast and supporter, I agree with Jonathan that it may be time to sit back, relax and reflect a little bit until FDA enlightens us with their first round of guidance on social media and the life sciences industry. Having said that, I am certain that the agency’s first iteration will provide us bloggers with sufficient fodder to write about and ignite round 2 of the discussion. In the meantime, @Skypen of Ignite Health graciously created a website called Everything About the FDA, Internet & Social Media that provides updates, commentary and even tweets (#FDASM) about FDA progress or lack thereof.

I think that social media has a role to play in the life sciences industry. However, the role has yet to be defined mostly because of the lack of regulatory guidance in the area.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Tweeting!!!!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Mark Senak, author of the EyeonFDA blog and “all around good guy,” has created a Twitter list that follows the tweets of all of the pharmaceutical companies that use Twitter. Because the list of companies that are currently using Twitter is so small, it is a convenient aggregation tool to monitor the musings and tweets of companies that participate! 

 Hat tip and shout out to Mark!

Until next time....

Good Luck and Happy Holidays!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Jonathan Richman, author of the Dose of Digital Blog, got it exactly right in today’s post  entitled “Patients WILL Have the Final Say on Pharma Social Media” He was spot on with his conclusion that while social media pundits and patient advocacy groups can push FDA to attempt to provide guidance on the use of social media, in the end, it will be patients (customers) not regulators who determine whether or not pharma will incorporate social media into future business models. Recently, it has been pointed out (on Twitter of course) that patient advocacy groups were under represented at the recent public FDA hearings on social media. While this is true, it likely will have little bearing on the regulatory guidance ultimately issued by the agency. This is because public input is generally not used to fundamentally shape regulatory guidance or policies but to fine tune them! The agency generally has a regulatory framework in mind before it conducts public hearing to collect stakeholder input and comments.

As I mentioned in previous posts, FDA intentionally crafts regulations and guidelines that are subject to interpretation because they are meant to serve as the minimum regulatory requirements and standards that must be met to insure drug and device safety and efficacy. While this is not ideal for many corporate regulatory affairs professionals, it is necessary because the agency simply cannot provide specific or custom-designed guidance to the plethora of drug and device manufactures that it oversees.  In other words, the regulations that FDA crafts are meant to serve as general regulatory frameworks not clearly defined, company-specific rules and regulations. Companies that struggle with interpretation of FDA regulations are encouraged to meet with FDA regulators for guidance and clarification. More importantly, while FDA is charged with insuring the safety and efficacy of drugs and devices, the agency has very little control over how companies choose to interact with patients, customers and stakeholders. For example, companies ARE NOT required to submit direct-to-consumer (DTC) ads, marketing and advertising campaigns or other promotional materials for FDA review. This means that drug and device manufacturers have enormous flexibility in choosing how to market, advertise and promote approved products. FDA regulators only get involved when the agency is alerted to the possibility that certain ads or promotional materials may contain inappropriate, misleading or inaccurate medical information or claims. When a company is “snagged” by FDA for suspect marketing practices, the agency generally imposes mandatory regulatory review (for a defined period of time) of all subsequent DTC and promotional campaigns developed by the transgressor. To that end, the lack of patient advocacy testimony at the recent FDA hearings on social media should have little or no impact on the guidance that FDA ultimately issues.

While the much anticipated guidance ought to provide a regulatory framework for companies that choose to use social media, it can not “force” drug and device manufacturers to adopt or use it. This will be a corporate decision that will likely be made by legal, regulatory and marketing pharmaceutical executives. Finally, as Jonathan rightly points out, the needs and demands of patients will ultimately determine whether or not a drug or device manufacturer implements a social media strategy. And, not surprisingly, this decision will likely be based on drug sales and business outcomes rather than a need for patient education or public safety. Because—at the end of the day—business is business!

Hat tip to Jonathan!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Tweeting!!!!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Earlier this week, Mark Senak who writes the EyeonFDA blog, offered his insights and analysis of pharma’s relationship with Twitter. Today, he tackled YouTube and Pharma. While YouTube has been around a lot longer than Twitter, pharma’s use (with the exception of Johnson and Johnson, Sanofi-Aventis and Tibotec) of the popular video-sharing site has been extremely limited despite the ability of the entity that posts the video to eliminate or regulate the ability of users to leave and share comments after viewing it. 

I suspect that the industry’s reluctance to use YouTube may be related to the lack of regulatory guidance for this medium. Nevertheless, I don’t completely understand why drug makers have chosen not to use the widely popular video site to increase patient awareness about certain medical conditions or to promote patient wellness. These types of videos would likely be appreciated by the public and quite possibly help to repair tarnished image of the pharmaceutical industry held by many consumers and stakeholders.

Hat tip to Mark!

Until next time....

Good Luck and Good Viewing!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Mark Senak who writes the EyeonFDA blog has compiled a list of the life sciences companies that presently have a Twitter account and use it. While there are only 12 companies on the list, he provides a nice commentary on their use and makes some recommendations for improvement.

Although I am a staunch supporter of the use of social media in the life sciences, it appears to me that the discussion about its use has been somewhat muted since the FDA convened a public hearing on the topic last month. I suspect that many of the companies and stakeholders who participated in the discussion prior to the FDA meeting are presently in “wait and see” mode. However, don’t be surprised if the social media guidance issued by FDA is lacking and excruciatingly wanting!!!! For those of you who may not be familiar with the ways in which the agency operates, its regulators tend to craft guidance and regulation that are broad, loosely defined and open to interpretation. The agency intentionally crafts its guidance and regulations this way because it doesn’t want its rules and regulations to be “literally interpreted” by companies and other stakeholders. Generally speaking, its regulations represent the “minimum” requirements that must be met in order to insure regulatory compliance. In other words, there is no upper limit on what companies can do to insure compliance but there certainly is a minimum requirement that must be met to avoid regulatory sanctions and penalties. As one lawyer who used to work for the agency shared with me recently, “FDA crafts the regulations but it is left to the companies and courts to interpret them.”

Most of the current discussions about social media and the life sciences industry primarily focus on its use as marketing and promotional vehicle. And, as many of you may already know, FDA isn’t exactly keen or pleased with the current marketing and advertising strategies and practices utilized by a sizeable number of life sciences companies. Perhaps a shift away from marketing and advertising discussions to more regulatory-friendly and practical applications like clinical trials recruitment and public outreach may lead to a more rapid uptake of social media by FDA and life sciences companies? Just sayin’

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Tweeting!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

I realize that I have been blogging about adverse events for the past couple of day but, let’s face it; the pharmaceutical industry lives or dies by the number of adverse events (AEs) that are reported for approved and marketed drugs. In any event, I came upon an interesting post in a Pharmaceutical Processing e-blast about the results of a survey  (conducted by Pfizer) which revealed that physicians are more likely to report side effects and adverse events through an electronic health records (EHR) system as compared with traditional paper methods. Nearly 60 percent of the 300 physicians who responded to the survey also agreed that AE reporting through an EHR would improve patient care.

While the results of the survey are not surprising (to me anyway), they suggest that the use of electronic methods for adverse events reporting may be a boon to drug manufacturers that are required (by FDA and other regulatory agencies) to collect information regarding the safety and tolerability of approved and marketed drugs.

In a previous post, I opined that social media would be an ideal platform for AE reporting. The results of the Pfizer survey tend to support this supposition. While EHR aren’t exactly social media, they are electronic and, it appears to me (based on Pfizer survey results), that healthcare providers and consumers may be more likely to report potential AEs using electronic as compared with conventional methods. Put simply, electronic reporting is much simpler, quicker and more facile than the current pen and paper model for AE reporting. And, in today’s rapidly paced and hectic world, time savings can translate into cost savings and improved efficiencies.

Paradoxically, the Pfizer survey results tend to contradict the notion that social media would be a bane to AE reporting for most drug makers. As I mentioned yesterday, many drug makers who have almost universally shunned social media, contend that the use of social media would overburden their AE reporting systems and possibly put them at enormous legal and regulatory risk. However, as I pointed out many times in the past, AEs are an expected reality in the pharmaceutical, biotechnology and medical devices industries. And, while drug makers are deathly afraid of AEs and reluctant to learn of them, the more information this is available about potential safety and tolerability issues, the better off most drug manufacturers may be. For example, if Merck was alerted earlier about the cardiovascular problems that Vioxx patients were experiencing, then possibly fewer patients may have been affected and harmed and perhaps, an improved version of Vioxx, an effective pain medication, might still be availability to patients who benefit from it.

To that end, providing physicians, healthcare workers and consumers with an accessible e-based AE reporting system built around social media would allow drug makers to quickly determine whether or not one of their drugs exhibits tolerability or safety issues that might warrant further investigation.  And, I believe that putting the appropriate social media AE reporting systems in place would allow drug and device manufacturers to monitor the performance of their products in real time and more accurately monitor, collect and analyze safety and tolerability data for certain drugs. This, in turn, would likely lead to the development of improved safer and more effective medications and devices, lower drug development and manufacturing costs and ultimately reduce drug makers’ exposure to legal and regulatory actions.

Until next time...

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

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

In a previous blog post, I raised the possibility that the life sciences industry may be using adverse event (AE) reporting to explain why it has been slow to adopt social media as a means of communicating and interacting with its customers and stakeholders. The industry argument against social media goes something like this: by engaging physicians, consumers and other stakeholders in social media conversations, there will be a massive and unmanageable explosion of AEs posted to social networking sites, company websites and health and science blogs. Because of this, companies will be obliged to report them to FDA. Company executives’ fear that this will be inordinately expensive, egregiously time-consuming, technologically-daunting and most importantly, expose companies to possible legal and regulatory actions. While some of these claims may have some validity, they are not as expensive, technologically-challenging or insurmountable as anti-social media advocate would have you believe. For example, while conducting an interview for Life Science Leader magazine for an article on social media and pharma, several pharma employees exploring the social media space confided that most companies already have assiduously-crafted AE reporting policies in place to easily manage and accommodate AE reporting from  websites, cell phones and even text messages! For those of you who may be wondering, before potential AEs are required to be reported to FDA it must meet the following criteria: (i) there is an identifiable patient; (ii) there is an identifiable reporter or observer; (iii) there is a specific drug or biologic involved in the event; and (iv) there is an adverse event or fatal outcome.

Jonathan Richman (social media guru and pharmaceutical marketing expert) and I have previously weighed in on the so-called “adverse event reporting myth” that has been circulating in life sciences social media circles. In fact, I posited in my previous post that adverse event reporting may actually be something of a “red herring” being used by the industry. For those of you who may not be familiar with the term, it means focusing on an obvious and easily identifiable issue or object to draw attention away from a more important central issue.  To that end, I was pleased to read a post today on Jonathan’s Dose of Digital Blog entitled 166 Reportable Adverse Events Equals One Red Herring.

In today’s post, Jonathan does some basic mathematical calculations and arrives at the conclusion (based on the occurrence and frequency of Internet-based adverse events disclosed in a recent Nielsen survey) that the likely number of adverse events posted on social media sites per day would be around 166 (for the entire industry). Doing some of my own high-level mathematical calculations; this translates into a likely total annual number of about 60,590 AEs. And, as Jonathan rightly points out, if this number is divided by the number of life sciences companies with approved drugs and devices on the market, you quickly realize that shouldn’t be that onerous, labor intensive or expensive for companies to manage AE reporting resulting from social media sources. It would be interesting and informative to compare this annual rate with the actual number of reportable annual adverse events being handled by life sciences companies today. 

Like Jonathan, I believe that the “adverse event reporting issue” is a classic example of a “red herring” being employed by the life sciences industry to explain its reluctance to jump on the social media bandwagon. Personally, what I believe is really at stake, is the systemic changes that would be required to transform a historically, opaque and unresponsive industry into a transparent, accountable and responsive one that would be required if it embraces social media as an integral part of its business model.  

Addendum:  Shortly after posting this article, a new post appeared on the Dose of Digital blog that provided an indepth analysis of the Nielsen survey and its implications.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Much has been written about social media but who has time to ponder all the analytical data to come up with trends and cool statistics? 

To that end, I was reading Dec/Jan edition of Forbes Small Business (FSB) magazine and I came upon some random social media tidbits that I thought were worth sharing.  I cannot vouch for the veracity of the information but sources were cited to confirm the facts.

35% of Americans 18 and over used social media of some type in 2008; only 8% were involved with social media in 2005 (source: Pew Internet and American Life Project)

95% of business decision makers worldwide use social networks (source: Forrester Research)

Of 2000 recent tweets that were analyzed by Peer Analytics:

• 4% were spam
• 6% were self promotional
• 9% were “moderately interesting”
• 38% were conversational
• 43% were “babble”

Finally (and not surprisingly):

87% of adults said they prefer dealing with others in person instead of via computers or smart phones (source: Centralvalleybusinesstimes.com)

I am not sure what it all means but I figured the info was worth a shout out.

Hat tip to FSB!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Networking

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Mark Senak, social media advocate and author of the EyeonFDA blog, has been spot on with his commentary on the recent public hearings held by FDA to unravel the social media conundrum facing the life sciences industry. Despite its good intentions, the agency is intent on applying an anachronistic method of developing guidance (designed for processes that undergo incremental changes) for a technology that changes rapidly and is ill-defined. In other words, they are trying to force a square peg into a round hole—it simply won't work!

As duly noted by Mark, FDA seems focused on inconsequential and banal issues like fair balance. The whole concept of fair balance has never been clearly defined and companies continually do everything possible to test the agency's resolve on the issue by finding new ways to push the envelope.Therefore, it makes no sense to me that the agency would choose to focus on the question of fair balance and social media when more pressing issues like adverse event reporting, responsibility for site content(when tools like Google Sidewiki are available to Internet users ) and off-label promotion of approved drugs and devices. As Mark rightly points out, is anybody really going to read the fine print about side effects and adverse events associated with a drug when they click through on an ad that promotes a medicine that might help them? Do people really read the product insert forms that accompany all prescription drugs?

Don't get me wrong. I am not trying to play down the importance of fair balance but DTC advertising is old hat and most experts agree that it really doesn't work well to sell prescription drugs. To that end, I think FDA needs to throw out the old play book and create a new one for social media. Unlike previous regulations, the ones that will guide social media need to be flexible and adaptive enough to accommodate the rapidly changing social media landscape. Nobody said it was going to be easy but that is why FDA employees get paid the big bucks!

Until next time....

Good luck and Happy Thanksgiving!!!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

The public hearing held by FDA last week in Washington DC to address social media and promotional advertising in the pharmaceutical seems to have altered the agency’s perspective on all things digital. Today, according to a press release, marked the agency’s completion of a coordinated week long international effort called the International Week of Action (IIWA) that was intended to curb illegal actions involving medical and pharmaceutical products.

During the effort, the FDA's Office of Criminal Investigations (OCI), in conjunction with the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research and the Office of Regulatory Affairs, Office of Enforcement, targeted 136 Web sites that appeared to be engaged in the illegal sale of unapproved or misbranded drugs to U.S. consumers. None of the Web sites are for pharmacies in the United States or Canada.

The agency issued 22 warning letters to the operators of these Web sites and notified Internet service providers and domain name registrars that the Web sites were selling products in violation of U.S. law. In many cases, because of these violations, Internet service providers and domain name registrars may have grounds to terminate the Web sites and suspend the use of domain names. Apparently, FDA has taken to sending warning letter en masse—it previously sent identical warning letters to 14 different pharmaceutical companies for improprieties associated with Google search ads.

Is there really a sea change taking place at FDA? Will a carefully and thoughtfully- crafted guidance document on the use of social media be next; now that the agency is no longer afraid to navigate the Internet? Only time will tell....hopefully sooner, rather than later!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Surfing!!!!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Unlike many of my social media colleagues, I’m not attending the FDA public hearing taking place in Washington, D.C today (Friday the 13^th oh my). I wanted to attend and actually testify but I didn’t understand how the process works and blew my opportunity. However, I will be prepared for rounds 2 and 3 and beyond. I can assure you that this will not be the last public meeting organized by the agency to develop guidance for the use of social media in pharmaceutical marketing and advertising. 

The brouhaha over social media and its use in the life sciences industry is purportedly taking place because of the lack of regulatory guidance on the topic. While I agree that FDA needs to craft a reasonable regulatory policy for the use of social media for promotional purposes, the discussion taking place has little to do with the medium and everything to do with the fair balance of ads that are used to promote drug sales. For those of you who may not know, fair balance (in regulatory parlance) means that drug manufacturers are required to fully disclose in print, television, radio and internet ads the benefits as well as the side effects and risks associated with a specific product. Unfortunately, too often, drug makers tend to promote the therapeutic benefits of a drug but downplay its side effects and risks. This isn’t surprising because drug makers, like other for-profit companies, must sell as much product as possible to generate sufficient revenues to remain profitable.  And, as we all know, consumers and physicians are more likely to use or prescribe drugs that have therapeutic benefits without many side effects or risks.

Since the inception of direct-to-consumer advertising, FDA and drug makers have been playing a cat-and mouse-game with the fair balance issue. Most drug makers understand the “balance” that FDA requires for traditional promotional ads, but rather than abide by the rules, many choose to determine how far they can bend the rules before they appear on FDA’s radar. Therefore, it should come as no surprise that drug companies have adopted the same strategy when it comes to Internet advertising and search result ads. To be fair, FDA hasn’t crafted any definitive guidance on Internet advertising or search ad fair balance requirements. However, rather than apply what they have learned over the years about fair balance in print and television advertising, many drug makers chose to ignore fair balance requirements for Internet advertising simply because there are no written regulations or rules. To that end, 14 pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies recently received warning letters about their misuse of promotional drug ads that appeared with Google search results. FDA cited the lack of fair balance in the search ads as reasons for the warning letters. By issuing identical warning letters to 14 different drug companies, the agency was essentially saying “c’mon guys, who are you trying to kid—you ought to know better by now!”

Unfortunately, even when there are regulations, many companies spend hundreds of millions of dollars to look for deficiencies and loopholes that can be exploited to increase and improve drug sales. Therefore, I contend, that regardless of the social media guidance that FDA ultimately issues, drug and device manufacturers will continue to look for work arounds to regulations that they perceive hinder product sales.  

Social media is all about transparency, accessibility and communications between participants. The guidance that FDA issues about the use of social media in the life sciences industry will likely be circumspect and open to interpretation as it usually is. As one FDA legal expert explained to me, “FDA crafts the laws but it is up to the judiciary  to interpret how they ought to be applied.”

I suspect little will change until drug manufacturers realize that full disclosure and transparency, not half-truths and opaqueness, will ultimately lead to improved drug sales in the future.

Until next time...

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

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

In today’s edition of the incisive EyeonFDA blog, Mark Senak, provides a historical perspective on events leading to the US Food and Drug Administration public hearing on the use of social media and medical promotion that will be held on Thursday and Friday, November 12 and 13, 2009. As Mark points out, registration for the meeting was closed because of an overwhelming response and the number of people who wanted to offer testimony on the topic. Many social media enthusiasts view the public hearing as something of a “game changer” that may influence the future direction of social media in the life sciences industry. But, as Mark, astutely points out, only four pharmaceutical companies and one or two trade organizations will be participating at the hearing. 

The lack of industry participation at the meeting is curious given that 14 companies received warning letters several months ago about their misuse of ad associated with the results obtain by Google search. Further, pharmaceutical companies have consistently and publicly stated that their aversion to social media is contingent upon the lack of FDA’s regulatory guidance for its use. By not actively participating in the public hearings later this week, many pharma companies have chosen to remain silent and will likely allow FDA to craft social media policies that guide the promotional activities of drug makers on its own. This begs the question: why would drug makers allow a federal regulatory agency to unilaterally dictate policy, when the policy will likely affect their bottom lines, i.e. sales and profits? The industry’s refusal to actively participate in these hearings is another example of the cat and mouse game that drug makers like to play with FDA. Put simply, drug makers expect and want FDA to commit (in writing) to certain policies and guidelines and once established, company regulators and lawyers are instructed to find loopholes and work-arounds. I liken the drug industry’s refusal to actively participate in the upcoming public hearings to the now infamous rope-ad-dope strategy Mohammed Ali used to knock out George Foreman in the now infamous Rumble in the Jungle in 1974. This is how wikipedia defines the rope-a-dope: “The rope-a-dope is performed by a boxer assuming a protected stance, in Ali's classic pose, lying against the ropes, and allowing his opponent to hit him, in the hope that the opponent will become tired and make mistakes which the boxer can exploit in a counterattack.” I hope that I am wrong about the drug industry’s strategy and motives.

Without active industry participation it isn’t clear how effective the FDA public hearing on social media will be. As Mark adroitly points out in today’s post, “The bulk of the other presentations are tertiary stakeholders perhaps sensing a vehicle for free self-promotion such as advertising and public relations firms and bloggers, but they aren't the real stakeholders in this issue.  The real stakeholders are those who are referred to in the meeting notice - the medical products industry.” I would also add the American public to the stakeholder list who also has considerable “skin in the game.”

Pharma’s active participation at many of the social media conferences that I recently attended indicates that something must be in it for pharma; otherwise they wouldn’t attend. There is no question that social media isn’t a passing fad and is now an integral part of the Web 2.0 experience. That said, for the first time in many years, drug makers have a unique opportunity to actively voice their ideas and concerns and collaboratively work with FDA to craft meaningful social media regulatory guidance. As many of us “outside observers” know, the agency doesn’t have all the answers and we would like to think that drug makers would extend a helping hand to avoid confusion and misunderstandings about the use of social media to promote their products and services. While only 4 companies are scheduled to speak at the hearings, I suspect that there will be many life science company representatives in attendance. Nevertheless, despite what may happen at this week’s hearings, I hope that, going forward, drug makers and device manufacturers will begin to view FDA as a partner rather than an adversary!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

As somebody who has been unemployed more than once, unemployment can be depressing, very frustrating and extremely worrisome.  In addition to sending out resumes and networking, I highly recommend using the free time that you have at your disposal to learn new skills to either make your life more manageable or to increase your employability.  Obviously, unemployed persons usually don’t have the money to enroll in formal training programs but thanks to the Internet and social media there are a variety of free tools and options out there for people looking to pick up new skill sets. 

Amber Johnson at OnlineDegreePrograms.org has put together a list of 100 skills you should learn (for free) while unemployed. While many of her suggestions are intuitive, there are a few on the list that may surprise you and quite possibly improve your chances of finding a new job!

100 Skills You Should Learn (for Free) While You’re Unemployed

People Skills and Networking

Become a better networker, small talker and listener to improve your job prospects.

1. Listen: Become a better listener by tuning out background noise and making eye contact.
2. Build a portfolio: Have an organized hard copy and file on your computer that succinctly and accurately represents your best work.
3. Share the conversation: Don’t dominate the conversation: learn to take a step back when you’ve said your part, and know when to jump in if the conversation becomes all about them.
4. Understand your emotional intelligence: Become more socially aware and learn to evaluate your own emotions and reactions.
5. Bring personality to a company: Being able to provide something that people can relate to behind the big corporate name is priceless.
6. Make your resume Internet ready: Make sure your updated resume will display nicely when you e-mail it and post it on job sites.
7. Set an example: Learn how to inspire others by doing what you love, being expressive, and helping others along the way.
8. Expand your network: Tap into contacts two or three degrees removed from your regular network.
9. Network or interview on the phone: Stop working on your in-person networking skills for a minute and remind yourself how to win someone over via the telephone.
10. Give a strong handshake: Impress people with your confidence by giving a better handshake.
11. Remember people’s names: From face association to repetition, there are various ways to remember a person’s name.
12. Know when and how to use icebreakers: Become the one other people depend on to make connections and feel comfortable.
13. Make a point to grow existing relationships: Don’t just get to know people on the surface: get to know business and personal contacts on a deeper level.

Life hacks

From making your own coffee to saving gas, here you’ll learn valuable skills that save you money, too.

14. Make your own coffee: Cut back on expensive coffee runs by learning how to make your own cup.
15. Comparison shop: Comparison shopping will save you money and turn you into a more responsible consumer and better product researcher.
16. Learn how to be more energy efficient: Save money on energy bills at home and at your new office when you get hired again.
17. Save gas: Minimize the number of times you have to spend money on gas by making each fill up last longer.
18. Eat cheaply: Watch this video to learn how to make yummy meals out of dollar-store food.
19. Discover your life purpose: Discover how to tap into your life purpose and passion to give you more direction in your job search and life goals.
20. Face reality: Accepting and dealing with reality will help your career and your personal life.
21. Cook: While you have the time, learn to cook healthy, budget-friendly meals for yourself, and use leftovers.
22. Being positive: Stop complaining and turn yourself into a positive thinker.
23. Meditate: Meditation will help get you through the tough times.

Productivity and Task Mastering

Stay productive and learn to stay on task, avoid procrastinating and set goals even when you’re unemployed.

24. Get up on time: Learn how to get up right when your alarm goes off to get a fresh, productive start to the day.
25. Funneling: The art of funneling means that you know how to manage incoming projects and to-do lists, and prioritize them accordingly.
26. Speed reading: You’ll be able to stay on top of industry reports, news stories, job postings and more when you learn to speed read.
27. Break things down: Turn difficult tasks into easier ones by breaking them down and taking it day by day.
28. How to set goals: Setting goals will help you be more successful, in the short-and long-term.
29. Overcome fear of failure: Fear of failure wastes time and prevents you from doing what you really want.
30. Beat procrastination: This step-by-step guide will help you beat procrastination.
31. Prepare a to-do list: A well-organized to-do list will keep you on track and save time.
32. Learn the Pomodoro Technique: Those who are anxious about meeting deadlines should master this technique.
33. Eliminate distractions: Learn how to tune out distractions and interruptions.

Computer and Internet Skills

These skills will turn you into a better Googler, blogger and typer.

34. Online research: Besides helping you find a job, solid Internet research skills will make you a desirable job candidate.
35. Learn how to use different operating systems: Train yourself to learn how to use Macs, Windows and Linux systems.
36. Hack Google: Learn all of the Google shortcuts and business tools.
37. Build a high-traffic website: Promote yourself and show potential employers how you can improve their websites.
38. Use Facebook productively: Turn Facebook into a business tool for networking, branding and more.
39. Basic web design: Employers will snatch you up if you know even basic web design.
40. Blog: Becoming an expert blogger takes time, so use your unemployment to learn the technical and business side of blogging.
41. Telecommute: Learn how to work with others online.
42. Learn to type: Typing quickly and correctly saves you time and makes your work look more professional.
43. Create a podcast: This fun and simple skill could increase your job prospects too.

Organization

Organize your personal and professional life by learning these skills.

44. Be punctual: Being punctual forces you to map out your day according to appointments and to-dos.
45. Use spreadsheets: Spreadsheets are great organizing tools and are used at almost every office.
46. Sort email: Set up folders, archives, filters and searches to organize all of your emails.
47. Prioritize: Prioritize your tasks so that it’s easier to work down your to-do list.
48. Use a calendar: Make use of an online calendar to set up alerts and more tools to help you stay organized.
49. Improve your memory: Practice different techniques to improve your memory.
50. Organize your closet: A better organized closet will help you stay on top of chores and get ready faster in the mornings.

Writing

Write better emails, use better grammar and influence others with your writing.

51. Write better emails: Write effective, impressive emails and subject headings.
52. Learn correct grammar: Poor grammar will hurt your career prospects in a heartbeat.
53. Persuasive writing: Learn how to write more persuasively and passionately.
54. Write for the Internet: Writing online pieces is completely different than writing for traditional media.
55. Write the perfect cover letter: Write a better opening and remember to include all the important details.

Confidence

These skills will boost your confidence and make others take notice of you.

56. Work on body language: Learn how to stand confidently, make eye contact and relax.
57. Trust yourself: If you’re constantly worried about what other people think of you and your decisions, you’ll come across as weak and inexperienced.
58. Examine your soft skills: Discover what soft skills make you a good employee: leadership, dedication, or the ability to motivate others.
59. Master the job interview: Be prepared, be confident and research the company and person you’re interviewing with.
60. Handle rejection: Stay confident and inspired even when you aren’t getting call backs.

Promotion and Branding

The skills you learn to promote yourself now will pay off later.

61. Design for branding: Learn how to think creatively and visually in order to promote your brand.
62. Understand copyright: Learn about copyright laws and how to get your own patent.
63. Promote yourself without bragging: You’ve got to learn how to relate to people and make them interested in you and your experience, without bragging.
64. Know — and own — your best attributes: Show off your ability to close a sale or put on your resume that you’re the one to call if a decision needs to be made.
65. Being accountable: Monitor what’s being said about you online and on social networks, keep track of your brand’s reputation, and own up to any mistakes or issues people have with you.
66. Use Twitter effectively: Learn how to use Twitter to boost your brand and reputation, not diminish it.
67. Develop your message: Learn how to create a focused, engaging message.
68. Write a press release: Even if you don’t work in PR or marketing, being able to write a press release is a valuable, desirable skill personally and professionally.
69. Follow up: Make sure you follow up on promises and after meeting new people.
70. Identify an audience: Learn how to rework your message depending on who you’re speaking to.

Speaking and Communication

From better storytelling to learning a new language or becoming an effective public speaker, these communication skills will make you more influential and confident.

71. Learn a foreign language: Speaking at least two languages greatly increases your desirability as a job candidate.
72. Storytelling: For presentations and networking, it helps if you’re a good storyteller.
73. Keep it simple: Don’t babble; instead, learn to speak clearly and simply.
74. How to make transitions: Making smooth transitions in your talks and presentations will strengthen your speech overall.
75. Deliver bad news: You should learn how to be diplomatic and break bad news considerately.
76. Consider things from different points of view: Relate to your audience and act like a fair leader by considering various points of view.
77. Give a compliment: If you’re uncomfortable giving compliments, you’d better learn how to get over it.
78. Negotiate: Negotiate salary, job offers, payment, and more.
79. Conflict management: Learn how to be more diplomatic and solve problems in the workplace.
80. Speak to executives: Don’t be afraid to talk to the boss, just make sure you do it the right way.

Finance

Save money and learn smarter budgeting tips here.

81. Open a Roth IRA: Use a little of the money you have saved to start a Roth IRA for the future.
82. Pay taxes as a freelancer: If you’re freelancing between full-time jobs, you’ll need to learn how to do your own taxes.
83. Turn eBay into a money-maker: While you’re out of work, learn how to use eBay to make extra cash.
84. Haggle: Get better deals on food, entertainment, clothes and more when you learn to haggle.
85. Lower your cell phone bill: Learn how to lower your cell phone bill when you’re tightening your budget.
86. Get a tax extension: If you just can’t pay your taxes this year because you’re unemployed, learn how to get an extension.
87. Consolidate debt: This skill may help you with a finance problem at work and alleviate some of the burden of high interest rates.
88. Make a budget: This practical skill will save you money and help you trim expenses at work.
89. Find a bargain: Learn when to go generic and hunt for bargains.
90. Save: Practice restraint by setting up savings accounts and spending less.

Weird Skills

You never know when you’ll need to win a fist fight or have to know your tolerance for alcohol, so practice now.

91. Win a fist fight: Man up and learn how to win a fist fight or street fight.
92. Be more photogenic: Look more attractive and confident in photographs.
93. Know your tolerance: Before getting wasted at networking events or office parties, know how much booze you can handle.
94. Be a respectful house guest: Review basic etiquette and send a thank-you note the next day.
95. Know when someone is lying: Be able to tell when someone else is lying to protect yourself.

Miscellaneous

From tying a tie to taking better notes, here are more skills you should learn while you’re unemployed.

96. Stay on top of industry news: Make reading industry reports and niche news blogs a habit for when you’re unemployed and when you get a job.
97. Get comfortable with international travel: Even if you can’t afford a plane ticket, read world news, learn a language and keep up with other cultures to broaden your horizons and show potential employers that you’re open to traveling for them.
98. Tie a tie: Make sure you always look presentable by tying your tie correctly.
99. Keep your brain active: Keep learning so that you’re in shape to tackle new challenges when you do find a job.
100. Take better notes: Learn to take notes during interviews and meetings.

There you have it!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

e-Patients Connections 2009 (#epatcon) was held this past Monday and Tuesday at the Park Hyatt hotel in Philadelphia, PA. BioCrowd was one of several co-sponsors of the event. The theme of the conference, organized by Kevin Kruse a veteran medical communication and training expert, who now runs Kru Research, was to “reach, engage and educate empowered digital health consumers.” And, boy, did it deliver! While this was Kru Research’s first official conference, it was well organized, extremely interactive and the quality of the speakers was second to none! Topics that were featured included social media and the life sciences industry, technological advances in e-based healthcare delivery, the relationship between the news media and healthcare information and the continuing evolution of online and e-based healthcare communities.

Conference attendees included representatives from the life sciences industry, medical communications experts, advertising and marketing professionals and a multitude of social media enthusiasts and consultants who kept the Twitter screen humming throughout the meeting (a big shout out to the “troublemaking table”). And, surprisingly, there was a representative from the Division of Drug Marketing and Advertising and Communications (DDMAC) at the US Food and Drug Administration, who I believe, was one of the most sought after individuals at the meeting. CNN reporter Elizabeth Cohen who writes the Empowered Patient and racecar driver Charles Kimball, a type I diabetic and company spokesperson for Novo Nordisk also gave talks.

My favorite talks were those presented by online patient community organizers including Tricia Geoghegan of Ortho-McNeil-Janssen Pharmaceuticals who created the Facebook ADHD Allies community, Lisa Tate of WomenHeart and Robert Schumm of Bayer Consumer Care who created Facebook Strong@ Heart and Rachel Lewinson of the Juvenile Diabetes Research Organization and Susan Harrow Rago of Novo Nordisk who created Juvenation.org a website dedicated to those with Type I diabetes. These communities are outstanding examples of how partnerships between pharmaceutical companies and advocacy groups can help to better educate the public and heighten awareness about potentially life-altering diseases. Another example of a great online community and healthcare portal is Insomnia 123.com. This website was conceived and constructed by Christine Macadams and her partners’ one of whom is a practicing physician. Unlike the other online communities, which are sponsored and mainly supported by consumer healthcare division of large pharmaceutical companies, Insomnia 123.com was exclusively created by a group of concerned individuals who wanted to better educate and improve the lives of people with insomnia—a largely unreported and self-medicated condition.

On the technical side, the talks presented by Lee Segal of Klick, Kevin Durr of Avantera , Ian Kelly of Red Nucleus and Scott Ballenger of ListenLogic were illuminating and extremely informative. Some of the innovations taking place in digital media are exciting and almost overwhelming at times (even for a social media enthusiast like me). I think the company to watch is ListenLogic which uses semantic search engines to collect real time data and “chatter” on the web. This technology may provide a cost-effective solution to assuage the concerns of many life sciences companies that claim that collecting and analyzing overwhelming amounts of data is one of the main reasons why they are reluctant to entry the social media space.

Marc Monseau of Johnson and Johnson gave an illuminating talk on his experiences as a corporate blogger and Twitter user and described some of the challenges that had to be overcome before his company was able to break the “social media barrier.” Janice McCallum, an economist by training and a healthcare communications and media expert gave an informative talk about the growing role and impact of patient-generated healthcare content on patient awareness and education.

Finally, the novel and innovative Pecha Kucha sessions were outstanding and extremely well done! While all were expertly crafted, Dr. Val’s and Jonathan Richman’s Pecha Kucha were memorable. Dr. Val’s, which was extremely powerful and moving, was performed entirely in verse and Jonathan’s was—well, one of Jonathan’s always entertaining and informative presentations.

In summary, the “e-Patient Connections 2009” was a resounding success and in my opinion reached its goal to “reach engage and educate empowered digital health consumers.” That said, I can’t wait for “e-Patient Connections 2010” meeting!!!

Hat tip to @ellenhoenig and @eileenobrien for inviting me to my first tweetup (great fun) and finally meeting @janice McCallum, @christianeTrue, @stevewoodruff and Silja aka @whydotpharma! 

Until next time...

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

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

I came across a recent post on Adage.com entitled “Pharma Drops Search Advertising After FDA Warning” that revealed that paid search ads by pharmaceutical companies dropped a 84% between March 26 of this year and the end of June. As you may recall, March 26 was when 14 companies received warning letters from the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) indicating that they had violated marketing guidelines for search ad advertising. The letters stated that sponsored-link advertisements for specific drugs were misleading due to the exclusion of risk information associated with the use of the drug -- even though the regulatory agency's guidelines are for print and broadcast, not online or social media. Pharma companies that believed they were in compliance with the unwritten "one-click rule"— taking the consumer from the ad to a site that offered fair balance and the risk information by clicking on the ad. What? Did I read that correctly; the words “unwritten and FDA” in the same sentence? This is very surprising since anybody who has worked with the agency is well aware of the “if it isn’t written it didn’t happen” principle. But I digress....

The post went on to say that pharmaceutical companies are “fearful of running afoul” of the agency again. Say what? The words “pharma and fearful” used in the same sentence? The point that I am trying to make is that pharma chose to keep things vague about web-based advertising to see how far they can push the envelope with FDA instead of taking the proverbial “bull by the horns” and directly asking FDA for guidance on web 2.0 technologies and their uses. Wouldn’t it be in everyone’s best interest if companies took a more active role to help craft new rules on the use of new media technologies rather then rely on and wait for FDA to do it for them? While the old “cat and mouse” game worked for old media, it is no longer tenable when it comes to Web 2.0 and related technologies.

The FDA is holding public hearings next month to begin the process of establishing internet advertising guidelines and the use of social media in the life science industry. This offers drug and devices companies an opportunity to show FDA that they no longer want to be part of the problem but part of the solution.  I have always subscribed to the notion that “you don’t get if you don’t ask!”

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Surfing (on the Internet that is)

blog comments powered by Disqus

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

For the first time in history, more people are searching the Internet for health information than asking doctors. Web 2.0 and social media tools are allowing people to discover new ways to connect, learn and engage one other in search of healthcare and drug information.

e-Patient Connections 2009 which will be held in Philadelphia, PA on  October 26 and 27 will feature a number of leading authorities on social media and digital health  Some of the featured speakers include Wired Magazine’s Thomas Goetz, Jay
Bernhardt of the CDC, and Lee Aase of the Mayo Clinic. The conference also offers case studies, 1:1 coaching sessions with industry experts and the latest products from digital health companies.

BioJobBlog readers can use the discount code kru500 to save $500 off the current price.

See you there!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

While pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies have been reluctant to use social media, Bio-Rad, Applied BioSystems and other life sciences reagent and instrumentation companies have jumped on the YouTube video train with reckless abandon.

A quick perusal of the molecular biology-related videos on YouTube reveals several scintillating titles like “Do the Double Helix,” “DNA Replication Rap,” and my personal favorite from Bio-Rad, “The PCR Song” (see video below)

Until next time....

Good Luck and Good Watching !!!! 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Mark Senak at the EyeonFDA blog reported yesterday that the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is seeking public input on the use of social media in the pharmaceutical, biotechnology and medical devices/diagnostic industry. Meetings to solicit input will be held in Washington DC on November 12 and 13^th.  This will be the first opportunity for industry representatives and the public to begin a discussion with FDA on the policies that will guide the use of social media in the life sciences industry.

According to EyeonFDA, on Monday, the agency will publish a notice in the Federal Register announcing this historic event (see excerpt below)

Questions have arisen regarding the application of the prescription drug and device advertising and labeling provisions, regulations, and policies of promotion on the Internet, especially with regard to the use of emerging technologies such as blogs, microblogs, podcasts, social networks and online communities, video sharing, widgets, and wikis. This section briefly discusses the issues the agency has identified as most frequently raised by regulated companies and other interested parties. It should be noted that although a question may raise a particular issue, that does not necessarily mean that the agency will issue guidance or a regulation on that issue. The agency invites comment at the public hearing on the general concept of Internet promotion, positive or negative; on any aspect of Internet promotion that is of interest to the presenter; and on the topics outlined in the following paragraphs. We are specifically interested in data and research on the use of social media tools in promotion, including data from companies on their own experiences, the extent to which health care professionals and consumers are using and are influenced by various social media tools, and the impact of Internet and social media promotion on the public health.

For the past year or more, many bloggers and other social media enthusiasts have taken FDA to task for not taking action on the topic. Finally, the agency realized that something had to be done given the growing use and popularity of social media tools and strategies in other less regulated industries. Earlier this week, in an unexpected move, FDA launched its first Twitter feed. Perhaps this was a hint that FDA is beginning to emerge from the dark ages into the digital world of Web 2.0 and social media.

Hat tip to Mark!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Twittering !!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Mark Senak who runs the EyeonFDA blog reported yesterday that the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) had launched a Twitter account. As Mark aptly points out, FDA’s unexpected leap into social media is ironic given that the agency has been steadfastly reluctant to craft any guidance whatsoever on the use of Web 2.0  technology or social media by drug and device manufacturers. Maybe, the agency was tired of being overshadowed by the Centers for Disease Control in Atlanta, GA whose rapid adoption and use of social media for public health and related issues has been outstanding. 

For those of you FDA aficionados, FDA can be found on Twitter at @FDA_Drug_Info. Despite its very recent launch, the agency already has over 1,700 followers. Not surprisingly, FDA_Drug_Info is following only six individuals and is largely a one-way informational channel. Maybe somebody ought to tell the agency that social media, most notably Twitter, is suppose to be interactive and conversational? Also, couldn’t FDA staffers come up with a better Twitter handle? I mean the use of underlines to separate words in FDA_Drug_Info is so ......Web 1.0!!!! Finally, most of the information tweeted by the agency has to do with drug approvals, workshop announcements, safety warnings, etc. Maybe somebody also should tell them that most life sciences companies block Twitter and other forms of social media. Nevertheless, based on some recent tweets, it appears that the agency is targeting healthcare providers and consumers as their main audiences.

Despite FDA’s Twitter presence, I wouldn’t expect any Web 2.0 guidance or a drug and device social media policy any time soon. I say this because the agency yet to craft guidance on website design and Google Ads—two very ancient internet tools!!!! Maybe they ought to appoint a social media czar at the agency?

Until next time....

Good Luck and Good Tweeting!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

I have previously written several posts on the reluctance of life scientists to use social media and online social networking sites. While I realize that scientists may be somewhat socially challenged, the almost universal disdain for social media is puzzling and troubling to me. More importantly, the reluctance of life scientists to embrace social media flies in the face of some revealing new statistics on social media use by the American lay public.

According to a recent survey by Forrester Research, “half of online adults now belong to social networks like, Facebook and Linked In, a 46 percent growth rate year-over-year.” More importantly, almost a quarter of Americans are content creators who write blogs, upload video or audio or post articles online.” Interestingly, the growth of social media is being driven by adults 35 and older. The survey found that four of five adults of all ages use social media including blogs, social networks and review sites. Finally, most adults visit social networking sites, in way or another at least monthly.

Many scientists who I have talked with (mostly graduate students and postdoctoral fellows) primarily use social media to stay in touch with friends or “hook up” with others after laboratory hours are over. And, other scientists—mostly laboratory heads and principal investigators—view social media as a colossal waste of time. Unfortunately, the scientists who underutilize or shun social media don’t understand its hidden potential to advance scientific research and perhaps more importantly to interact with the lay public to demystify “science.”  In my experience social media has been a powerful way to disseminate information and quickly reach large numbers of people. Isn’t this what science is really about?    

Until next time....

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

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Twitter is arguably the hottest new platform to hit the social media scene is the past five  years. Twitter devotees are convinced that anything is possible if the microblogging platform is used correctly. In today’s economy, the most pressing need for many people is finding a job. While Twitter is effective for branding, marketing and occasionally some witty intellectual exchanges, its usefulness for jobseekers has yet to be demonstrated. To that end, there was a recent instructional case study on TwiTip—“5 Methods I Used To Get a Job Through Twitter”— that describes how Twitter can be used to find gainful employment. Although the case study focuses on non-science jobseekers, many of the suggestions and recommendations are relevant to those seeking jobs in the life sciences.

Read and learn!!!

Until next time...

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

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

The whole world is atwitter about Twitter (pun intended). One of the reasons why social media tools like Twitter are so effective is that information can reach very large audiences almost instantaneously.

While there are constitutional guarantees of free speech in the US and elsewhere, there are certain things that are safe to tweet and others that are not. This is especially true if you are corporate employee or a jobseeker looking for a new opportunity. While this ought to be intuitively obvious to most, younger and less well-experienced individuals may not know the “unwritten rules” pertaining to office workplaces and job searching.  To that end, there is a wonderful post on the Resume Bear website(@ResumeBear) that lists 20 things that jobseekers and employees should never say on Twitter.  Although some of the examples and recommendations are comical and funny, getting fired or not getting a job because of something you might have said on Twitter isn’t. 

Until next time....

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

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Lisa Roner, blogger and editor for EyeforPharma, recommends a podcast on social media that was created by Dr. Andree Bates, CEO at Eularis, a company that applies analytics to determine the sales impact of specific marketing programs.

Dr. Bates says it is an important area for pharmas to become engaged in social media.  In the podcast, she offers some ideas about how pharma marketers might apply these channels effectively. Also, she offers some tips and hints for intrepid pharma employees who are interested in getting started.

To listen to the podcast click here.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Networking!!!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

BioCrowd co-founder, Vincent Racaniello, and I were chatting the other day with Crowdvine’s Tony Stubblebine (the guy who created the BioCrowd software platform) about the reluctance of scientists to embrace social media. Both Vincent and I, both scientists ourselves, posited that scientists are simply asocial or at the very least not comfortable engaging in social activities whether they be online or IRL. Tony, a self-anointed software geek, wasn’t buying into to our argument and noted that even software geeks are social!

This prompted me to do a little research and I found a blog post written by Nachiket Vartak a blogger and doctoral student at the Max Planck Institute for Molecular Physiology. While the blog post focused mainly on reasons why bioscientists won’t use Twitter, I think that many of his observations can be used to generally describe the chilly relationship between many scientists and social media. Before you read on, I must inform you that I paraphrased and embellished some of Nachiket’s original ideas on the subject. That said, here are some of the reasons why bioscientists may not use social media.

1. The reputation of social networking sites
Many scientists disdain social networks because they believe that social networking sites and microblogging platforms like Twitter are nothing more than places to waste time. Those scientists who use social media usually do it in-between experiments and when planning activities which usually involve copious quantities of alcohol, for after laboratory hours fun. In other words, social media is for fun not for work. Also, many so-called serious scientists contend that “real science discussions” only happen on closed e-mailing lists or forums and not in the “open” on social networking sites.

2. The social activation barrier
According to Nachiket, the stereotype that scientists are asocial is well.....err...true! He asserts that many scientists feel more comfortable focusing on themselves (and their research) rather than interacting with others to learn what they have to say or what they may be thinking. And, many times, unless an individual can demonstrate that they are “smart” they probably aren’t worse listening to anyway. Finally, scientists train for years to become independent investigators. Not surprisingly, there is very little emphasis and importance placed on teamwork or social interactions with others scientists or lay people for that matter. Therefore, it should come as no surprise that many scientists aren’t particularly social or inclined to participate in extracurricular social activities.

3. Privacy aka “secrecy”
Science is a highly competitive endeavor and, in many cases, the discoveries that are made represent many years of sacrifice, blood, sweat and tears. With this in mind, nobody wants to be scooped or beat out by their competitors. Consequently, scientists are generally instructed to be very hush-hush when it comes to sharing any information or data that might give the competition a “leg up” in the competition. Any leak, large or small, could mean the difference between fame and failure and, perhaps more importantly, a successful career as a scientist.

In marked contrast, the success of social media is contingent upon its openness, sharing and transparency. Thus, as Nachiket aptly pointed out social media is antithetical to the very nature of science and scientists.

4. Legitimate channels of communication
The only acceptable and legitimate means of scientific communications are presentations at meetings and publications in peer reviewed journals. These forms of communication are the lifeblood of scientific community and critical to the success of all scientists. If you aren’t published, you have no credibility as a scientist. The scientific publishing and communication industry is big business and “the rules of engagement” in the industry have been well established and institutionalized. Unfortunately, social media threatens to destabilize the science publishing world both financially and philosophically and possibly change the way science information is communicated. Therefore, it should come as no surprise that there is little support for social media in scientific publishing world and the science community in general.

While the number of science blogs and podcasts continue to increase daily, scientific social networking sites continue to struggle. This is because the information flow in blogs and similar forms of social media can be easily monitored and controlled. This is not the case for social networking sites like BioCrowd and microblogging platforms like Twitter.
However, if scientists are truly asocial beings then none of the existing science social networking sites will gain traction and be successful. Call me crazy, but I think social networking is an ideal medium for scientists to exchange information, ideas and develop relationships that can help them jumpstart their careers!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Networking!!!!!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

At the recent Social Communication and Healthcare conference I was invited to run a roundtable discussion entitled “How to Build a Social Networking Site for Bioprofessionals.” The discussions were well attended, primarily by employees several pharmaceutical companies and vendors who sell scientific equipment and reagents. Several bloggers and medical communications professionals also attended.

While microblogging platforms like Twitter are slowly supplanting traditional networking sites as the social medium of choice, themed online communities like BioCrowd--hich was exclusively designed for bioprofessionals ranging from scientists to venture capitalists—are still useful for jobseekers and people who are interested in a “richer” networking experience. For those of you who are interested in social networking sites, I wrote a brief synopsis of the two roundtable discussions that I conducted.

Please feel free to contact me with any additional thoughts, ideas or comments you may have about the piece.

 Until next time...

 Good Luck and Good Networking!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Pharmaceutical,biotechnology and other companies that sell prescription drugs and devices are deathly afraid of adverse events (AEs) associated with their products. For those of you who may not know, companies with approved prescription drugs and medical devices are required to track and report any adverse events associated with their products to regulatory agencies like the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). If FDA receives enough AE complaints about a product, the agency will investigate to determine whether or not there may be efficacy, safety or tolerability issues with it. And, if FDA thinks that the AEs are legitimate, it may ask a company to conduct Phase IV clinical trials with the product in question or require that changes be made to the product’s label. Not surprisingly, these outcomes can be time consuming and perhaps more importantly, costly. Label changes—especially for blockbuster products—frequently lead to changes in physician prescribing habits which can translate into a loss of revenue. Despite the fact that ALL drugs exhibit AEs, many companies falsely cling to the hope that there will be few, if any, AEs reported for their products.

While drug makers are very familiar with the range of possible AEs associated with their drugs—all AEs for a drug are identified and reported during clinical trials—pharmaceutical executives are concerned about social media activities, because they fear that than the number and frequency of AEs reported for their products will increase. This, in turn, would prompt FDA and other regulatory agencies to investigate and more closely scrutinize their marketed products. As Jonathan Richman, author of the Dose of Digital Blog points out in an excellent post entitled the “Myth of Adverse Event Reporting” AEs are a fact of life for prescription drugs. And, that social media may help to improve adverse reporting. Like Jonathan, I contend that social media might allow drug makers to more effectively identify potential safety issues with a product earlier in its lifecycle and thereby minimize possible deleterious effects of the drug on certain patient populations. I think that drug manufacturers ought to begin to consider how they might effectively use social media to improve AE reporting rather than ignore the potential upside of this new medium.

The Myth of Adverse Event Reporting

Adverse Events are nothing more than negative reviews. If you want people to genuinely talk about your brand, they are going to say negative things. But how often do posts include adverse events? Nielsen decided to take a look at this rather than simply assume it was ” a lot,” which of course is a difficult number to manage. Nielsen looked at Yahoo Health boards and took 500 postings. Of these, only 1 contained enough information to qualify as an adverse event that needed to be reported. That’s 0.2%. Why so low? Turns out that someone simply saying that your drug caused them to have a headache isn’t enough to qualify as an adverse event. Nielsen summed up the pieces of information required to report an adverse event and there are four pieces: “(i) an identifiable patient; (ii) an identifiable reporter; (iii) a specific drug or biologic involved in the event; and (iv) an adverse event or fatal outcome.” (Hat tip to Pharma 2.0 for the summary). The study showed that one or two of these pieces were often available, but not all four. In addition, they found that it would be impossible to get all four even with some effort. In fact, the FDA says, “[Without these pieces] a report on the incident should not be submitted to the FDA because reports without such information make interpretation of their significance difficult, at best, and impossible, in most instances.”

This is because people often don’t register or leave their personal information in a post, so there is no way for a company to follow up and fill in the blanks. Naturally, if there is something significant, every effort should be made, but on the often anonymous Internet, this is usually difficult. Suppose for a moment there were several adverse events that need to be reported. How often do they need to be reported? The FDA is pretty clear on this. For new drugs, reports need to be filed quarterly for three years. After that, it’s annually. For “serious and unexpected” events, these have to be reported within 15 days. However, there’s a pretty high threshold for an adverse event to be considered “serious and unexpected.” Every company already has these reporting channels in place, so it is simply a matter of including adverse events received from social media into the workstream. 

Yes, it’s a balance. The fact is adverse events should not be the reason why healthcare shies away from social media. These risks can easily be mitigated and, if done right, can actually be used in a positive way. So, don’t use adverse events as an excuse anymore. You’ve got the data. 1 in 500 posts include a reportable event. You report quarterly at most (which you’re doing anyway). How much ongoing effort do your other marketing programs require? Probably quite a bit more than this. Next time you hear this excuse, you’ve got the data to dispel the myth of adverse event reporting.

Until next time...

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

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Mark Senak, author of the EyeonFDA blog and social media enthusiast, posted a great piece about pharma’s reluctance to adopt social media and the changes in adverse event reporting-- aka pharmacovigilance--requirements that may change this attitude. 

Hat tip to Mark!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

I met Jonathan Richman,the author of the Dose of Digital blog, last week at the BDI Conference (#BDI) on Social Communication and Healthcare in NYC. BTW, for those of you who were unable to attend, you missed an informative and compelling meeting on the status of social media in the pharmaceutical and healthcare industries. Anyway back to Jonathan. He gave a great talk on pharma and social media which prompted me to visit his blog. While perusing Dose of Digital, I came upon a wiki that Jonathan maintains called --what else-- the Pharma and Healthcare Social Media Wiki.” 

It’s a comprehensive, cataloged list of social media initiatives underway at pharma, biotech and healthcare industries. Noticeably absent from the wiki, are social networking sites like BioCrowd that were specifically created for life scientists and other bioprofessionals. Hey, wait a minute, aren’t scientists the lifeblood of the life sciences industry? Would there be a life sciences industry without scientists? Hmmmm....I will have to talk to Jonathan about this!

I highly recommend you check out the wiki if you are a life sciences social media enthusiast!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Social Media Hunting!!!!!  

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

The “Social Media and Healthcare” conference that will be held on July 23, 2009 in NYC at the Graduate Center of The City University of NY (365 Fifth Avenue at 34th Street) is shaping up to be a great one. At present, over 350 people have registered for the meeting. There are a few slots left if you are interested in attending.

Several BioJobBlog readers have asked whether or not the sessions will be recorder and available online. Steve Etzler, one of the conference organizers told me that Blogtalkradio.com will broadcast and archive the audio from all of the case studies that will be presented during the morning sessions. Unfortunately, the round table discussions won’t be available.

As I may have mentioned, Cliff Mintz, Co-Founder of BioCrowd will be leading a roundtable discussion entitled “Building Social Networking Sites for Bioprofessionals.”

See you on Thursday!!!

Until next time....

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

BioJobBlog and BioCrowd along with the Business Development Institute, the Journal of Communication in Healthcare and others are co-sponsoring a meeting entitled “Social Media and Healthcare” that will be held on July 23, 2009 in NYC at the Graduate Center of The City University of NY (365 Fifth Avenue at 34th Street). Topics that will be covered include:  

1. Managing regulatory and legal issues when planning and implementing social media strategies
2. Is there a role for social media in President Obama’s healthcare reform plans?
3. Why real-time social media tools like Twitter are gaining momentum and when it makes sense to use them
4. How social media has affected crisis communications in the healthcare industry
   
5. Selling social communications projects and proving ROI to senior management
   
6. Creating and participating in communities to achieve communication, educational and branding objectives
7. Planning and executing a social communications plan with little or no budget
8. Building relationships and partnerships with new healthcare media leaders beyond advertising
9. Best practices for using social communications to connect internally with employees and stakeholders
   
10. Tools, technologies, and best practices for monitoring and measuring social communications

The meeting’s agenda features case study presentations and a series of roundtable discussions on social media topics. I will be leading a roundtable discussion called “How to Build a Social Networking Site for Bioscientists.” Approximately 300 senior marketing, communications and media professionals from Fortune 1000, middle market and emerging growth companies are expected to attend from leading pharmaceuticals, medical technology/device companies, managed care providers, hospitals, healthcare media companies, government and nonprofit organizations.  

BioCrowd members can register for the meeting at a discounted rate of $155. Check it out—it will be money well spent!

Hat tip to Steve Etzler at the BDI and Mario R. Nacinovich Jr., Editor-in-Chief, Journal of Communication in Healthcare for organizing this topical and important meeting.

I hope to see you at the meeting next Thursday!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Mark Senak, who writes the outstanding Eye on FDA blog, posted an interesting article today that tracks the number of warning letters issued by DDMAC (the center that oversees life sciences marketing and advertising) over the past 12 years. Not surprisingly, the number of warning letters issued by DDMAC fell precipitously during the Bush Administration, after reaching a high during the waning years of Bill Clinton’s presidency. In fact, the number of warning letters issued by DDMAC during the first two quarters of 2009 exceeds the yearly total of warning letters issued in the past 4 of five years. However, as Mark clearly points out, the 2009 year to date number of warning letters may be artificially inflated because of 14 identical ones issued on the same day (April 2) to 14 different companies regarding internet search engine advertising. Nevertheless, it is becoming increasingly apparent that the agency is beginning to emerge from a long slumber and that US regulatory oversight may be entering a new, more scrutinizing era. 

While increasing regulatory scrutiny may be appropriate after 8 years of no regulation at all, it is important that FDA doesn’t overreact and unnecessarily stifle new drug and product development. To that end, I believe that the agency needs to be reorganized, revamped and revitalized to replace its traditionally “reactive” way of doing business with a more “proactive” one.  For example, there is a burgeoning need for regulatory guidance on the use of social media by companies in the pharmaceutical, biotechnology and medical devices and diagnostics industries. Unfortunately, FDA has been unwilling or unable to enunciate a cogent regulatory strategy or any meaningful guidance on this topic. Consequently, many life sciences companies have refrained from using social media because they simply don’t know how to implement it in the current regulatory environment. I believe that FDA, not the companies it regulates, should take the lead on this issue.

Finally, it is becoming increasingly apparent that many companies will continue to refrain from using social media and other Web 2.0 tools until FDA crafts some useful guidance on these topics. Sadly, Web 3.0 is just around the corner and the agency is still struggling with regulatory guidance for corporate websites. Maybe Congress needs to craft some new FDA modernization legislation—it has been 12 years since the last modernization bill was passed!

Until next time....

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

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

While life sciences companies are still reluctant to take the “social media plunge,” many other companies (with active social media programs) frequently hire employees known as social media managers who oversee and run their social networks.  This is because successful social media websites require daily attention and are extremely time consuming and labor intensive. In general, employees who are hired for these jobs have strong backgrounds in social media and technology but frequently possess little expertise in the industry that they are working in. Because social media is so new, many hiring managers believe that the social media and technology skills of these managers are more important than an understanding of the industry that they work in. However, while this practice may be acceptable in other industries, it won’t be the case for the social media managers who oversee pharmaceutical, biotechnology and medical devices and diagnostics social media websites. These managers will likely be required to have a firm understanding of current rules and regulations guiding drug development and marketing and advertising of approved life sciences products. This will be necessary if the drug makers who hire these managers want to steer clear of regulatory scrutiny by the US Food and Drug Administration and other regulatory agencies.

Based on my experiences as an industrial scientist and more recently as a social media manager, a person with a PhD degree with at least one course in regulatory affairs, good oral and written communication skills and an interest in social media ought to be an ideal candidate for these positions. To that end, those of you who may be interested in this newly, emerging career path option ought to begin training as soon as possible—these jobs will be in high demand at life sciences companies, medical communications agencies and conference organizers in the next year or so!

Until next time....

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