Labour berücksichtigt das Vorgehen gegen große Pharmazahlungen an NHS -Ärzte
Labour considers crackdown on big pharma payments to NHS doctors
Von ThatchersDirtyTaint
Labour berücksichtigt das Vorgehen gegen große Pharmazahlungen an NHS -Ärzte
Labour considers crackdown on big pharma payments to NHS doctors
Von ThatchersDirtyTaint
15 Kommentare
Excellent. Certain medication, like resorting to antidepressants, is way too easily prescribed and doesn’t always appear to be in the patient’s interest.
And next do payments to political parties for lobbying 😊
£1 million over 3 years? So like next to nothing.
The rules on pharma payments to medics are strict. Used to be commonplace to get taken out to dinners etc. Now those days are over and the best one can hope for is they bring pizza or sandwiches when they come to give a presentation, which is hardly improper…
They also seem to be including covering conference costs / paying prominent speakers to give presentations in the figures, which is slightly silly.
Tbh I’d say the tiny numbers here are pretty re-assuring that pharma companies aren’t trying to financially sway clinicians in the way they used to.
What big payments? The uk pharma industry is already heavily regulated. Sounds like a Trump sound bite
> The NHS faces a crackdown on payments from pharmaceutical companies after The i Paper revealed that mental health medics have accepted nearly £1m from firms since 2021.
I am genuinely shocked that the amount is that small. £1m across four years, in a sector of the NHS worth £12bn per year?([ref](https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/insight-and-analysis/long-reads/mental-health-360-funding-costs)).
> For example, a consultant psychiatrist may be paid by a pharmaceutical company to speak at a medical conference in order to educate others or share research, and the NHS allows medics to do this in addition to their job in the health service.
Most NHS trusts are cutting funding that allows staff to go to conferences. Getting a supplier to pay for your ticket can make the difference between attending or not. And remember that CPD is mandatory for continuing professional registration for many professions. So long as you cite your conflict of interests on Slide 1, this is fine to me.
By all means, introduce better reporting of payments. But of all the problems in the NHS, this doesn’t feel like a significant one.
£1 million over 3 years in terms of payments to go to conferences that otherwise some of these doctors wouldn’t go to is hardly a bribe. The fees and travel (especially to the US can cost upwards of 10k, is the NHS going to pay that)
The intention is to not get them to prescribe their drugs, but to build relationships so when there is a clinical trial for example you can approach that physician and he/she would be keen to get involved (I.e. relationship building).
As for bribing these doctors, that’s a stretch. The overwhelming majority of these patients are on generics that cost a handful of £’s. Expensive, drugs that don’t work, would not be reimbursed by NICE anyway so there would be no value. What a non article trying to paint this as the opioid epidemic in the US
NHS Doctor here. Any ideas on how I get these big payments?
>For example, a consultant psychiatrist may be paid by a pharmaceutical company to speak at a medical conference in order to educate others or share research, and the NHS allows medics to do this in addition to their job in the health service.
Erm yes, normally when you want someone to some work you pay them? Lots of medics have split jobs, partly NHS work, partly teaching or research. Quite often they’re an honorary professor or honorary consultant, ie they have one job and the other „employer“ just pays the primary employer for their time X days a month to simplify pay/pensions/tax etc.
£1m over 3 years is 330k/Yr. Given a consultant psychiatrist is on somethibg like 90-120k depending on seniority, London weighting, additional sessions etc we are talking about the salary of 3-4 doctors spread amongst how many doing this paid work? 50? 10? It’s not exactly a gold mine for them
This is ridiculous. 140,000 doctors in the NHS, £250,000 over 4 years for pharma payment towards doctors in their capacity. So not even £2 per head per year?
Whoever proposed this should be made to resign for wasting everyone’s time
the people they should crackdown on are them fucking scumbag rip off Dentists!, its time there ongoing war against the nhs was severely looked at before the total collapse of nhs dentistry happens, theyve gotten away with it for far too long but now its blatant and needs government attention.
As someone who used to work in this specific field, I would be interested in how this would be implemented.
I think they will be targeting the Investigator Initiated Research here. This is when a pharma company pays a Reasercher for a piece of research that could be deemed as mutually beneficial. There is a whole process to review these and make sure they are fair market value. Pharma companies will pay said researcher to go on to conferences to present their own research of this drug, which provides some advertising. A lot of the time, when evaluating the research, which conferences they intend to go to and the number of abstract that are published are a big consideration.
However, this is a tactic to sway a doctors opinion onto your drug, as academic prestige is important to highly regarded doctors. So, the more research you can pump out, the better for you. It’s a mutually beneficial agreement. But I know it is a tactic used to give a positive view of your drug vrs a competitor.
Unfortunately, some of these doctors hold quite high positions in regulatory bodies, and their positive opinion could help get approval. I am aware that in other countries, their opinion alone can dictate whether your drug will be able to get fast-track approval. I have not heard this happening in the UK.
But what I do know is that if you are collaborating on research, said doctor is more likely to prescribe your drug than a competitor. Also, if very highly regraded doctors are presenting positive research on your drug. Other doctors are also more likely to prescribe your drug.
In summary, yes, this is a way of bribing doctors.
Given the rise in popularity of a certain someone, this sounds like a preventative measure. Good idea.
So they are taking away the free pens?
There will be riots I tell you.
We don’t get them any more.
Trust me, I’ve tried! But the BMA knocked this on the head back around 2000, and it’s essentially been regulated out of existence since then. Most we are allowed now is pens, or occasionally a USB drive.
If they stop this then, why would they stay with the NHS? Get paid more in other countries, also don’t we want people to earn more so they can be taxed at 40% ? Sounds like something that’s going to add to the already shortage of good doctors. Honestly should really be turning this inwards towards MPs!