The Political Inquirer

According to a new report from the AP, medical studies related to the drug Vioxx were written by Merck Co. medical writers, not research scientists like the studies claimed. The scientists involved were paid by the company to take credit for the ghostwritten articles, which raises concerns about the influence of pharmaceutical companies in the realm of medical research.

Should companies be premitted to influence which research is done, who writers the articles, and how the findings are presented, or should the government step in to prevent abuses? In my opinion, this is a prime example of a case where ‘market forces’ are not enough to solve the problem. Merck controls public opinion about their drugs via advertising to the public and published medical articles aimed at influencing doctors. This is a case where, left to their own devices, companies will manipulate the flow of information to promote their products, even if it means possibly harming consumers to do so.

Neither I, no Merck, are alone in our positions:

While Merck is singled out, the practices are not uncommon, according to JAMA’s (Journal of the American Medical Association) editors. In an editorial, they urge strict reforms, including a ghostwriting crackdown and requiring all authors to spell out their specific roles.

Now, one could argue that government intervention still isn’t needed. After all, JAMA has stepped in to solve the problem all by itself, without the government enforcing arbitrary regulations. Yet, consider the consumers that were already duped by the ads, the doctors whose credibility has been undermined, and the patients who suffered because the drugs weren’t actually helpful. Don’t they deserve justice?

To illuminate my point further, look how Merck has responded to the allegations:

Merck called the reports in Wednesday’s Journal of the American Medical Association false and misleading. Five writers of the articles were paid consultants for people who sued Merck over Vioxx’s heart and stroke risks; the sixth testified about Merck and Vioxx’s heart risks before a Senate panel. Merck says those connections makes the reports themselves biased.

JAMA hasn’t been using the most objective writers either, though the case for their choice of writers is far stronger than Merck’s. Exposing corrupt company policies and writing a medical article are two different things.

What I’m calling for is not an all-government quick fix for the problem. Rather, I think all three groups need to work together with a system of checks and balances. The government needs to put stricter penalties in place to stop this from happening, JAMA writers need to keep an eye on both the companies and their articles, and the companies need to provide products with integrity instead of shamelessly scrambling for profits. There’s more than profits in the medical business, after all. Medicine is about solving problems, not causing more.