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

Big pharma continues to lament the increased scrutiny being imposed on it by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Like it or not, the agency’s directive is to insure that the drugs that it approves are safe and effective for the American public. And, for the most part, the agency does its job and frequently catches companies that attempt to break the rules.

To that end, an article that appeared in FiercePharma last October noted that eleven big pharma companies had paid a total of over $6.0 billion in fines to the US government over the last two years or so. The biggest losers include Eli Lilly paid over $1.4 billion in fines because of alleged illegal marketing of its anti-psychotic drug Zyprexa and Pfizer which paid $2.3 billion for marketing missteps with three drugs including Bextra (pain), Geodon (schizophrenia) , Lyrica (neuropathic pain) and Zyvox (antibiotic). 

More recently, GlaxoSmithKline agreed to pay $750 million fine in a whistle blower lawsuit that alleged that the company had sold "adulterated products" manufactured in a Cidra Puerto Rico production facility. Also, the company announced last February that it intends to pay $3.4 billion to settle lawsuits alleging the improper promotion and sale of several of its products including the blockbuster diabetes drug Avandia and Paxil (depression).

The article also included a timeline of some of the other major settlements that have recently taken place (seen below)

Novartis
With: U.S. Attorney's office for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
When: Sept. 30, 2010
Infraction: Novartis agreed to a $422.5 million settlement with the Eastern District of Pennsylvania for its off-label promotion of Trileptal and other allegations against Diovan, Exforge, Sandostatin, Tekturna and Zelnorm.

Forest Labs
With: Dept. of Justice
When: Sept. 15, 2010
Infraction: After marketing Levothroid, an unapproved thyroid drug, Forest Labs received its penalty, to the tune of $313 million. The settlement also covered Forest's off-label use of Celexa for children's use.

Allergan
With: Dept. of Justice
When: Sept. 1, 2010
Infractions: Allergan's $600 million Department of Justice settlement was broken into two parts: $375 million in fines and $225 million in civil penalties, all of which stemmed from its off-label use of Botox for headaches, pain management and cerebral palsy.

Elan
With: U.S. Attorney's Office in Massachusetts
When: July 15, 2010
Infraction: The Irish drugmakers received its $203.5 million fine for its marketing tactics of Zonegran, an epilepsy drug. Also, the company's U.S. branch pled guilty to a misdemeanor and the company will enter into a corporate integrity agreement with the HHS Inspector General.

Johnson & Johnson
With: Department of Justice
When: April 29, 2010
Infraction: Though J&J's more infamous woes stem from its phantom recalls, two of the troubled drug maker’s subsidiaries received a $81 million penalty for off-label promotions of Topamax, an epilepsy drug.

AstraZeneca
With: U.S. Attorney's office in Philadelphia
When: April 27, 2010
Infraction: In the same week as the J&J settlement, AstraZeneca was hit with a $520 million penalty for its antipsychotic, Seroquel. The company misled doctors and patients about the drug's safety.

Despite concerted efforts by the US Food and Drug Agency to limit off-label promotion of prescription drugs, most pharma companies continue to see how far they can push the envelope before the agency catches up with them. Given the current budget woes facing FDA, don’t be surprised if the frequency of off label promotion and misrepresentation of prescriptions drugs continue to rise.

Until next time...

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

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

Despite what you may have been told, managing a career and finding new job opportunities is all about networking. Yes, I know that scientists and many other bioprofessionals loathe networking, but that is the way the game is played and if you want to win you have to play by the rules (written or otherwise).

Thankfully, the advent of professional social networking sites like LinkedIn and BioCrowd helps to take some of imagined or real discomfort associated with “in real life” networking where face-to-face communication is required. Despite the growing popularity of professional networking sites, many scientists and other bioprofessional have little idea about what they are and how they ought to be used! Because of this, Laura Hales, PhD, put together a mini-primer on how to use LinkedIn to maximize exposure to promote a business, find a job or advance a career.

Laura is the Founder and President of The Isis Group, a scientific communications company. She regularly blogs on tips for writing scientific manuscripts and grants at www.isis-editing.com/blog. Mention BioCrowd and receive a 10% discount on an overhaul of your CV or LinkedIn profile!

Five Strategies To Advance Your Career Using LinkedIn

By Laura Hales

OK, so you posted your profile on LinkedIn, connected with some colleagues, got a few recommendations … now what?

Tip 1: It’s your profile; here’s how to make it feel that way in five easy steps.

• Upload a good headshot. Crop out the background so that your face survives the shrinkage in quality and size required by LinkedIn.
• Accurately define yourself in your professional headline — along with your headshot, these shows up in LinkedIn whenever you do.
• Update your status frequently with a tweet, a new blog post, an interesting article you read, or a seminar you’re thinking of attending. This will keep you appearing in the digest of network activity that is sent to your connections every week.
• Fill your “Specialties” section with industry-related keywords so that people can find you in a targeted search.
• Customize your profile’s URL. This makes it easy for people to find you quickly (hit the “Edit” button next to “Public Profile” on your homepage and choose your own URL. Mine is: http://www.linkedin.com/in/lauramhales). Add it to your email signature.

Tip 2: You can join up to 50 groups. Max yourself out!

Use keywords to search for groups to join that can help you accomplish your goals, whether that’s finding a job or your next client. To avoid looking like a LinkedIn Groups “Junkie” (or to keep that job search under wraps), you can choose to hide a group on your profile. You can either do this when you join the group (by unclicking “Display the Group Logo on My Profile”) or at a later date (go to your Edit Profile page, hit “Change Visibility” next to the group’s name). If you stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night, you could even start your own group! Spam all your connections and see who joins.

Tip 3: Now that you’ve joined these groups, participate

There are so many ways to do this. Here are a few I’ve tried that really work:

• Start a new discussion asking for thoughts on a current trend in your field.
• Post interesting articles and include your opinion, or a thought-provoking question to the group about the article.
• Publish a link to your latest blog post, including an attention-grabbing headline about it (use bit.ly to shorten the blog post’s URL, and go back to bit.ly later to get analytics and see how many people clicked on your link).
• Subscribe to a digest of the activity in your groups and post comments on others’ discussions. This is a great way to gain exposure in your field and showcase your knowledge about various topics.

A related tip: To share a network update such as a blog post or article with multiple groups at once, hit the “Share” button after the update appears on your profile, then check the “Post to Groups” box. This allows you to enter in multiple group names to post your update.

Tip 4: Add applications to your profile (found under the “More” tab on your profile page)

LinkedIn users can incorporate a multitude of add-ons into their profile, with more being added all the time. These applications include:

• Reading List by Amazon: Not so much for the book you’re reading about potty training your two-year-old, but more about books relevant to your field or profession. Include your opinion about the book in a few sentences.
• WordPress/BlogLink: This automatically posts the title and the first few sentences of your latest blog entries.
• Tweets: Get on Twitter!
• Events: Let your network know what seminars, conferences and other events you’re planning to attend.
• Box.net/SlideShare: This application lets you share files such as your résumé or a recent presentation you gave. 

Tip 5: Use LinkedIn Answers (also under the “More” tab)

Subscribe to an RSS feed of the discussion groups you want to follow. Post answers to questions in your field of expertise, and if the asker of the question indicates your answer is the “best,” you’re on your way to gaining “expert” status in the community.

LinkedIn boasts that a new member joins every second of every day, making it a powerful networking tool. Good luck using these tips to help advance your career using LinkedIn!

This blog post originally appeared on the HiredPens Blog

 Until next time...

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

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

Charles Darwin was born on February 12, 1809. Many societies and institutions annually celebrate the anniversary of his birth by hosting a Darwin Day to celebrate his theory (dare I say it) of evolution. Typically, these celebrations are held at universities, museums and schools in parts of the US where evolution is embraced and taught. While laudable, these celebrations are akin to “preaching to the choir”—everybody involved already believes in evolution!

Jory P. Weintraub education director at the Evolutionary Synthesis Center in Durham North Carolina also realized this and decided to organize a scientific road trip—in name of scientific outreach and promoting science literacy—to bring Darwin’s theory of evolution to places where creation is alive, well and taught in many schools! Unlike many other scientists, Weintraub understood that safely sitting behind a desk in a science-friendly environment lamenting the lack of science literacy in the US isn’t going to cut it any longer. To that end, he convinced seven intrepid PhD scientists to take Darwin’s message on the road and present workshops on evolution in a variety of creationism-friendly, rural school districts in Virginia, Iowa, Montana, and Nebraska

Initially, some members of the team we worried about potential clashes between religious conservatives and themselves. Nevertheless, these team members overcame these fears and Darwin’s traveling road show became a reality. In the end, 19 schools agreed to host the scientists but negotiating the terms of the visits wasn’t always easy. For example, a Virginia High School principal sent out permission slips to parents to allow students to attend. Further, an Iowa museum director only publicized the workshop to teachers rather than the public to avoid raising the ire of its conservative Christian community. Generally speaking, the workshops appeared to be conflict free and surprisingly were well received by students and teachers who participated!

Sadly, despite incontrovertible proof that evolution is real, creationism is still taught in many schools throughout the US. Moreover, a new study found that few of the nation’s biology teachers tell students that evolution forms the foundation of modern biological sciences. In light of these findings, is it any wonder why the US may be lacking in global science competitiveness?

There is no question that Weintraub and his team ought to be lauded for their efforts “to boldly go where no scientists have gone before.” That said; if we truly want to promote science literacy and improve American science education, then more scientists ought to get out from behind their desks (and out of their laboratories) to literally take their science to the American public.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Educating!!!!!!!

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

In a first-of-its-kind study, researchers at the Public Citizen’s Health Research Group tracked the civil and criminal financial penalties levied against the pharmaceutical industry for wrongdoing over the past 20 years. 

The main findings of the study revealed:

1. Of the 165 settlements comprising $19.8 billion in penalties during this 20-year interval, 73 percent of the settlements (121) and 75 percent of the penalties ($14.8 billion) have occurred in just the past five years (2006-2010).
2. Four companies (GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer, Eli Lilly, and Schering-Plough) accounted for more than half (53 percent or $10.5 billion) of all financial penalties imposed over the past two decades. These leading violators were among the world’s largest pharmaceutical companies.
3. The practice of illegal off-label promotion of pharmaceuticals has been responsible for the largest amount of financial penalties levied by the federal government over the past 20 years. This practice can be prosecuted as a criminal offense because of the potential for serious adverse health effects in patients from such activities.
4. Deliberately overcharging state health programs, mainly Medicaid fraud, has been the most common violation against state governments and is responsible for the largest amount of financial penalties levied by these governments. This type of violation is also the main factor in the considerable increase in state settlements with pharmaceutical companies over time.
5. Former pharmaceutical company employees and other “whistleblowers” have been instrumental in bringing to light the most egregious violations and have been responsible for initiating the largest number of federal settlements over the past 10 years. From 1991 through 2000, qui tam (whistleblower) cases made up only 9 percent of payouts to the government, but from 2001 through 2010, they comprised 67 percent of total payouts.

The companies, their missteps and the fines imposed are shown below:

The authors conclude:

"Over the past two decades, especially during the past 10 years, there has been a marked increase in both the number of government settlements with pharmaceutical companies and the size of the accompanying financial penalties. Given the relatively small size of current financial penalties when compared to the perpetrating companies’ profits, both increased financial penalties and appropriate criminal prosecution of company leadership may provide a more effective deterrent to unlawful behavior by the pharmaceutical industry."

Interestingly, about a month ago officials at the US Food and Drug Administration signaled that were willing to prosecute company executives to the fullest extent possible (including criminal prosecution) to reduce the incidence of fraud, off-label marketing and manufacturing violations that have become commonplace in the pharmaceutical industry in the past five years.

Until next time....

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!

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

Although the economy is in the toilet and unemployment remains high, highly skilled and ambitious employees are usually not at risk of losing their jobs. In fact, these employees are highly sought after and frequently contacted by recruiters trying to get them to “jump ship.” In other words, there will always be jobs for these employees even though the rest of us may be unemployed. Companies clearly recognize the value of these employees and will use all available strategies to retain them. 

During good economic times, this usually means a promotion and a concomitant salary increase. However, during recessionary times companies tend to promote these “good” employees into position with greater authority without a pay raise: the assumption being that tacking on a fancy new job title with some added responsibilities will be sufficient to stroke an employee’s ego and ignore the lack of additional compensation for a larger workload. 

To that end, the folks over at the online masters degree website recently posted an article entitled Job Title Stuffing 101: 12 Buzzwords to Inflate a Job’s Importance. It is a veritable tutorial on inflated job titles and the one that you ought to avoid (see below) if possible.

1. Manager: This title may be given to anyone and everyone who ever heads up a project or department, no matter how large or small. It’s used to give slight leverage to the person in charge of the task at hand, but can mean little to the project manager’s supervisors. Because many companies push team creativity, the manager is primarily responsible for turning things in and will be the one to hear about if the boss isn’t satisfied

2. Strategist: A strategist of any type simply means you plan tasks and have some idea of how these tasks are most efficiently executed. For example, in the case of a content strategist, it means you create and organize the content of a newsletter, website, or blog. Is the job important? Sure. But for some reason content strategist sounds a lot more impressive than web editor. You take your pick, but if the former is going on your resume, you better deliver.

3. Deputy: In the age of the Internet, there’s a deputy for many jobs. What does this mean? Well, it means you aren’t quite a junior or an assistant, but the company doesn’t have the funds to pay you like they would someone with the actual title. An example is an editor-in-chief versus a deputy editor. One issuse that you may run into being a deputy of any sort is more on your plate than you bargained for. But you’re the deputy, so you can handle it, right?

4. Senior: Companies love to tack this one onto a title. Senior web writer or senior designers are common for firms. What does this senior title translate to? Anyone with 5+ years of experience in a field and still utilizing those skills can serve as a senior, usually without the pay or responsibilities of management. Simply put – you do your job well, but the buck stops here.

5. Producer: This one has become popular for the web. Web producer pops up on many mainstream blogs and sites. A producer can wear many hats, and for a company that means more bang for their buck. Sure, you will be producing content, but expect handling anything the project throws your way even if it isn’t in the job description (and there’s a solid chance it won’t be)..

6. Supervisor: Like managers, this title can be hit or miss. For large corporations that have had to cut back and eliminate lower level management, pawning the title of supervisor off on an entry level employee who’s been in their cubicle for six months means having someone in the office to make sure things run well without having to douse them in a raise. There are some supervisors who are able to oversee a small department, but ultimately are not the first in command for their subordinates.

7. Ambassador: This job title buzzword is almost an insult to the actual word! In the age of promoting, you know, everything, the job title of brand ambassador is given to celebrities in a niche group that endorse the product sometimes without appearing in ads. This person is contracted by the company or simply receives perks and free services from the brand. They often do little more than show up at launch parties and events and plugs the company as needed. For Channel, The Misshapes Leigh Lazar serves as a brand ambassador and for AT&T, there’s Internet has-been Justine. The problem with brand ambassadors is often large corporations are the last to discover the new face of a niche audience.

8. Professional: A friend says that anytime you have to tack the word professional onto your job title, you must not have a real job. This is up for debate, but let’s take a look at a couple of titles that utilize the word. How about professional organizer? Or records distribution professional? By the way, the latter is the new uppity name for mail room clerk. Yes, even those fresh out of college need an inflated job title. Professional used to mean you had proper training for whatever you do, now it means you are paid some type of wage for what you do, no matter how little that is or the responsibility it entails.

9. Consultant: Who knows what you do with this title. It can mean you directly fix problems, as in the case of IT consultants or it can mean you merely offer your advice, in the case of interior design consultants. Many consultants bring in the big bucks and are contracted by major corporations, but many others work for themselves and struggle to get by. While this title isn’t necessarily inflated, it doesn’t really give the total picture of what you’re hired to do either (which you may prefer).

10. Vice President: Somewhere in the past decade, a lot more vice presidents have shown up to the company picnic. Instead of having a manager of ____, that job became VP of Public Relations or VP of Human Resources. It means second-in-command, in that department and not much more. There used to be only one

VP per company, but we’re guessing the more, the merrier, even if it is job title inflation in its boldest form.

11. Global: Even a mom-and-pop shop can have a Global Director of Communications. It can be mom, working from the family’s dry cleaning business to update the company’s Twitter and Facebook pages. Many companies are employing social media personnel and since a lot of these companies indeed do business around the world, why not stick the word global onto the job title of someone who represents your business to the world? It makes the job sound more exciting and may get you onto someone’s Follow Friday!

12. Lead: The word lead in a job title can mean a lot or a little. In some cases, it means you are heading up an operation, but in most cases it means the company is utilizing you for your skills and maximum potential without proper pay. Some companies use this title as a stepping stone between entry level and a lower management position to see if someone is ready for the next tier of responsibilities.

While promotion without compensation is not novel, it is rampant in today’s uncertain economic times. A word of advice: if you are being considered for a promotion, the first thing that I would ask is whether or not the promotion comes with a pay increase. If not, you ought to think twice about accepting the promotion and call the recruiters back who are trying to lure you away to a competitor’s company. Accepting a position with increased responsibility without a pay raise sends a signal to management that you can be exploited and taken advantage of. And, management will likely continue to exploit you until you call that recruiter back who tells you that a person with your title and level of responsibility can earn much more at a competitor company! That begs the question: Is job title inflation without compensation really a good way to promote employee retention? I think not!

Hat tip to onlinemastersdegree.org

Until next time...

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

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• 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

The New York Times reported today that AstraZeneca has agreed to pay $520 million to settle two federal investigations and two whistle blower lawsuits over the sale, marketing and off-label promotion of its blockbuster antipsychotic drug Seroquel. Despite this settlement, UK-based AstraZeneca still must contend with 14,444 civil lawsuits filed by many patients who developed diabetes and other health related conditions because of misleading marketing that failed to adequately disclose that the drug caused abnormal weight gain.                     

AstraZeneca joins a growing list of pharmaceutical companies that have been penalized for off label promotion and misleading advertising. Earlier this year Eli Lilly & Co paid $1.4 billion over its marketing of another antipsychotic drug Zyprexa and Pfizer announced that it would pay $2.3 billion including a record-breaking criminal fine of $1.195 billion mostly for its painkiller Bextra which was withdrawn from the market.

Despite the size of the fines and settlement figures for these recent cases, they are a drop in the bucket when compared with the amount of money generated by illicit marketing and advertising. For example, the $520 million that AstraZeneca has agreed to pay to settle the Seroquel case pales in comparison to the $17 billion that the drug has generated in US sales since 2004. The same was true for Zyprexa and Bextra.

While these settlements cannot repair much of the damage that has been done to unknowing patients, it signals that the US government is beginning to live up to its pledge to provide safe and efficacious medicines to the American public.

Until next time...

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

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

I suspect that a majority of BioJobBlog readers have at one time or another been prescribed a drug to treat a particular medical condition or ailment. Like most of you, I assumed that my prescription information and history was private and that only healthcare professionals were privy to it. However, after reading an article in this Sunday’s NY Times, I learned how wrong I was! Much to my dismay,  I learned that prescription information including the name and dosage of a drug, the name and address of the physician who prescribed as well as a patient’s address and social security number is a commodity that is regularly bought and sold usually with a patients’ knowledge or permission. And apparently, this practice is perfectly legal as long as patient’s names are removed or encrypted before the information is sold, typically to drug manufacturers.

Unfortunately, privacy experts and information technology specialists contend that it isn’t difficult to match names, addresses, and social security numbers to reconstruct information that had supposedly been rendered anonymous. To make matters worse, until very recently, federal patient privacy and data security rules were loosely enforced and frequently abused by medical marketers, advertisers, drug manufacturers and retail pharmacies. Finally, re-identifying a patient’s prescription drug information and history provides drug makers with a powerful tool to target and market drugs to specific patient populations.

Tracking prescriptions and mining prescription data is not new—it has been big business for many decades. The major players in the drug mining business are companies like IMS Health, Verispan and CVS Caremark. Also, large discount pharmacy retailers like Walgreens and Target engage in this practice and they all sell their prescription information data to interested parties. Prescription drug data-mining companies say that their services are valuable and warranted because gathering and analyzing information from tens of thousands of patients helps drug manufacturers to identify trends and potential safety and tolerability issues with prescription drugs. Nevertheless, despite assertions that prescription drug data are anonymous when it is sold, class action and private lawsuits alleging this not to be the case have been filed against some of the major players including Walgreens, IMS Health and CVS Caremark. While this is troubling, loopholes in the current prescription drug data mining regulations allow pharmacy companies like Walgreens and others to accept money from drug manufacturers to mail advice and reminders to customers to take their medications without first obtaining their permission. The loopholes also allow drug makers to send customers’ promotional information and materials about drugs other than the ones that they are already taking.

Under the Obama Administration’s $19 billion healthcare stimulus package, selling prescription drug data to drug makers will still be allowed (only if patient’s names are removed). Also, subsidized marketing by drug makers will be allowed to continue but companies will no longer be able to promote drugs other than those the customer already buys. While the new legislation allows data mining and the sale of prescription drug information to continue, its primary goal is to tighten and insure patient privacy so that personal prescription drug history and information can no longer be used to exploit the buying habits and behaviors of individual American consumers.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!

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

The Eye on FDA blog reported today that AstraZeneca and Sanofi-Aventis have joined the ranks of Abbott, GSK, J&J and SanofiPasteur on YouTube. Pharmaceutical companies are taking advantage of the power of YouTube and other social media sites because regulatory guidance hasn’t been issued on its use to promote products or brand awareness. In other words, this is uncharted territory and companies can essentially 'test the waters' to see how far regulatory agencies will let them go.  I suspect that early life sciences company adopters of social media will garner substantial ROI before regulatory guidance is issued.

A lack of regulatory oversight, the ability to manage and control content and the low costs associated with creating Internet videos make YouTube and other social media sites attractive to pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies. The life sciences sector is just beginning to recognize the power of social media and the role that it may play in promoting products and brand awareness to consumers.  Expect many more life sciences companies to experiment with social media in the near future--its a veritable goldmine!

Until next time…

Good Luck and Good Video Watching!!!!!!! 

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