[JMintzer]

Originally Posted by Eg_cruz

So are you stating that doctors do not get paid for writing prescriptions? My doctor client in Ocala makes $100k for his writing ability.
Yes, doctors were BIG part of opium crisis in America, they over prescribed the medicine base off the pain scale(with the faces). The others were Big Pharm and pharmacies NO ONE had a system in place to control overmedicating. And YES BIG PHARM LIED about addiction to the medication.
We are forever overmedicating our population in the United States all for the mighty dollar.

Not by the Pharma companies...

Now, if they were "Pill Mills", the Feds might want to know about it...

[Wyseguy]

Originally Posted by La lamy

Well that's a great story! Happy to hear prescription meds worked so well for such an insidiously unhealthy habit. A 3 week behaviour modification course from the Lung Association in Canada helped me quit 19 years ago. Best thing I ever gave up, that's for sure.

My girlfriend in HS got me to quit smoking. Wouldn't kiss me if I smoked. I was 16 years old, weighing smoking on one hand vs making out. Quit smoking in one day.

[MandoMan]

Originally Posted by blueash

I don't have your unfailing recall of all things Ted Kennedy did, but please explain to me why a US Senator would have to sign a bill? The POTUS has to sign, a Senator has to vote. And to vote he or she must be in the Senate. So explain why did Kennedy sign a bill while skiing?

The voluntary restriction of medical junkets didn't happen until 2002 in a statement by Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America.
Astra zeneca made headlines when it announced in 2011 it would stop flying doctors to attend resort conferences

The Physician Payments Sunshine Act passed in 2010 as a section of the Affordable Care Law AKA Obamacare, was the first to require that drug companies report the money they spent on direct physician payment of money or things of value. Not the 1980's not Ted Kennedy and it did not prohibit those payments, only required public disclosure.

So what was the basis for your ridiculous statement?

Ted Kennedy was for decades the chief senate proponent of socialized medicine. He also had a hand in various bills that affected hospitals, doctors, pharmaceutical companies, and health insurance companies. He did a lot of good, even though he wasn’t able to accomplish his goals. However, he was also a politician, with all the bad things that entails. Back in the 70s he had a “fact-finding mission” that traveled around the country holding meetings at hospitals. At the time, my dad was the head chaplain at an excellent church-affiliated hospital in Denver (now part of the AdventHealth system). He was also on the hospital administrative committee, so he was involved in preparation for Kennedy’s visit and in the room while Kennedy was “finding facts” by interrogating administrators while the press watched and snapped photos. My dad felt that Kennedy had no interest in “finding facts,” but was simply seeking publicity and trying to further his agenda. My dad felt that Kennedy seriously misrepresented the hospital, asked unfair questions, and put well-intentioned answers in the worst light. Granted, this seems to be the case with many such meetings held by legislators. They often seem to know the answers they want to hear. As committee chair in the Senate, Kennedy didn’t SIGN these health bills, but he did have to sign off on such bills before they were presented to the entire Senate by the committee.

Health care legislation is difficult partly because of massive lobbying efforts by pharmaceutical companies, the AMA, hospitals, and insurance companies. They all want to protect their profits. One of the effects of Kennedy’s work was that hospitals stopped charging set fees for surgeries and other procedures and began itemizing everything used and billing piece by piece. I was working in an O.R. when that began, and I remember how much extra work it caused the circulating nurses who had to list everything used. I don’t think it saved any money. Hospitals and doctors soon learned how to use the system to maximize income. Similarly, pharmaceutical companies gained the right to advertise drugs, but then a few years later, new regulations required the companies to list side effects in ads—as fast as possible. It’s a constant war between government and businesses trying to make more money. Oh, and we can also throw into the mixture lawyers who promise to find malpractice where none exists and get you a big payout. I’m on the side of the consumer, usually, but I’m also on the side of doctors and hospitals, and I also make money from profits from pharmaceutical companies through my retirement investments.

[golfing eagles]

Originally Posted by MandoMan

Ted Kennedy was for decades the chief senate proponent of socialized medicine. He also had a hand in various bills that affected hospitals, doctors, pharmaceutical companies, and health insurance companies. He did a lot of good, even though he wasn’t able to accomplish his goals. However, he was also a politician, with all the bad things that entails. Back in the 70s he had a “fact-finding mission” that traveled around the country holding meetings at hospitals. At the time, my dad was the head chaplain at an excellent church-affiliated hospital in Denver (now part of the AdventHealth system). He was also on the hospital administrative committee, so he was involved in preparation for Kennedy’s visit and in the room while Kennedy was “finding facts” by interrogating administrators while the press watched and snapped photos. My dad felt that Kennedy had no interest in “finding facts,” but was simply seeking publicity and trying to further his agenda. My dad felt that Kennedy seriously misrepresented the hospital, asked unfair questions, and put well-intentioned answers in the worst light. Granted, this seems to be the case with many such meetings held by legislators. They often seem to know the answers they want to hear. As committee chair in the Senate, Kennedy didn’t SIGN these health bills, but he did have to sign off on such bills before they were presented to the entire Senate by the committee.

Health care legislation is difficult partly because of massive lobbying efforts by pharmaceutical companies, the AMA, hospitals, and insurance companies. They all want to protect their profits. One of the effects of Kennedy’s work was that hospitals stopped charging set fees for surgeries and other procedures and began itemizing everything used and billing piece by piece. I was working in an O.R. when that began, and I remember how much extra work it caused the circulating nurses who had to list everything used. I don’t think it saved any money. Hospitals and doctors soon learned how to use the system to maximize income. Similarly, pharmaceutical companies gained the right to advertise drugs, but then a few years later, new regulations required the companies to list side effects in ads—as fast as possible. It’s a constant war between government and businesses trying to make more money. Oh, and we can also throw into the mixture lawyers who promise to find malpractice where none exists and get you a big payout. I’m on the side of the consumer, usually, but I’m also on the side of doctors and hospitals, and I also make money from profits from pharmaceutical companies through my retirement investments.

Great post!!!!

Of course, I can think of at least one poster that will take exception to it

[Petersweeney]

Ike is turning in his grave thinking about all these Industrial Complexes that run the world…..

[Haggar]

On drugs.com there is an interactions checker. You put all the meds, vits and min you are taking this site will advise you which items interact.

[nn0wheremann]

Originally Posted by La lamy

I find TV ads about prescription drugs quite disturbing. The crazy long list of side effects included in these ads are such a turn off while watching TV. In Canada, direct-to-consumer advertising of prescription drugs is prohibited as a health protection measure. Manufacturers cannot advertise prescription-only drugs directly to the public because of their toxicity and the potential for harm from medically unnecessary or inappropriate use.
For me, I assume my doctor is the professional who will know what meds are appropriate for me. So my question to you is: has anyone ever gone to their doctor and tell them they want a certain drug they saw on TV?

I tell the doc to avoid any drug advertised on the evening news or the golf game. The co-pays are usually exorbitant anyhow.

[Cliff Fr]

I agree with you. We would be better off without the drug ads and also without all the attorney ads!

[La lamy]

Originally Posted by Wyseguy

My girlfriend in HS got me to quit smoking. Wouldn't kiss me if I smoked. I was 16 years old, weighing smoking on one hand vs making out. Quit smoking in one day.

[Puccini]

QUOTE=La lamy;2053619]I find TV ads about prescription drugs quite disturbing. The crazy long list of side effects included in these ads are such a turn off while watching TV. In Canada, direct-to-consumer advertising of prescription drugs is prohibited as a health protection measure. Manufacturers cannot advertise prescription-only drugs directly to the public because of their toxicity and the potential for harm from medically unnecessary or inappropriate use.
For me, I assume my doctor is the professional who will know what meds are appropriate for me. So my question to you is: has anyone ever gone to their doctor and tell them they want a certain drug they saw on TV?[/QUOTE]

I so sgree with you! The USA is the only country (that I am aware of) that allows drug commercials on tv. That is one reason, as someone else suggested, that our drug prices are out of control. I do not enjoy hearing about flatulence, psoriasis or toenail fungus or any of the multitude of diseases they claim to alleviate. Have written my congressmen to no avail since they are also being paid by drug companies. What is the answer—other than recording shows so you can skip over commercials? People have to start protesting. A long time ago, cigarette and liquor ads were banned, right?

[waterflower]

The FDA is fully financed bt big pharma..Do a little research..Follow the money.

[NotGolfer]

I for one hate the ads. I have rheumatoid arthritis and the drugs for that show people happily gardening, jogging or some other activity. While many of us are able to do some of those things, the majority cannot. It's a progressive, systemic disease and can affect all of the body (organs, joints, ligaments etc). I belong to a handful of support systems and the majority of people on them would agree with me! We TiVo everything so FF through the ads now.

There is mega-bucks in those ads (think Big Pharma). As for Golfing Eagles saying the doctors no longer get perks---I will respectfully have to disagree. I had a friend back home who was a M.A. and worked for a group. She used to tell us about the fancy dinners they'd be invited to by their vendors (drug companies). Meaning the docs and their support staff. This was in the 2000's prior to 2010.

I'm not sure how many people will purchase a drug product due to the ads. My doctor prescribes what she feels necessary for my issues. Besides the drug ads---particurily annoying are the insurance ads, the attorney ads along with "these will make you beautiful/thinner ads. I won't name any but y'all know the ones. They all seem like "fillers" between the segments of programming.

[blueash]

Originally Posted by Eg_cruz
So are you stating that doctors do not get paid for writing prescriptions? My doctor client in Ocala makes $100k for his writing ability.

Originally Posted by golfing eagles

Actually, I find that whopper not only insulting to the profession, but personally as well. The behavior that post alleges is not only unethical, it is criminal and would result in severe penalties. I hope your "physician client", whatever that means, reads this and knows who you are.

Any other physicians on this site outraged by this? Have any of you ever been "paid to write prescriptions"? To the tune of 100K????

I was never paid to write a script. However, I was asked to be on an advisory committee for a vaccine company which met twice a year at rotating expensive restaurants to discuss advances in vaccines and also to look at various ads that were to be placed in journals and advise on whether we felt they were effective, honest, eye catching etc. We were also asked about packaging, ordering issues etc.

On the other hand, I was offered potentially thousands a year for NOT prescribing which could risk the health of my patients. One of the hundreds of insurance companies with which we had a contract was capitated. That means instead of being paid for service given, we were paid a fixed amount per month for every person who selected our practice for their care.

I don't recall the numbers, but for example, we'd be contracted to receive 30/month per patient no matter how often we saw them. And they'd put aside 10/mo for paying specialists to whom we referred our patients, and 10/mo for drugs we'd write, and 10/mo for hospital/ER costs, thus spending 60/mo on each patient. Of course they got paid more than 60/mo to provide this coverage.

But then we were told that if we stayed under the amounts set aside for drugs, specialists, hospitals etc we would get 1/2 of it as a year end bonus if the insurance company made money. And we were provided a list of medications they were specifically watching due to high costs. We got a quarterly report on how we were doing. How many antibiotics we wrote, and were they inexpensive generics like amoxicillin or high price drugs like cephalosporins.

Our group did a lot of ADHD management, and all those drugs were on the don't write list other than short acting amphetamines. I don't believe our doctors changed anything in what they used based on this "incentive" But the carrot was waved in our face by the insurance industry. Put your own economic benefit into your calculation of what, if any, meds to write.
If the reader is interested in capitated health care, it still exists, and how it pays the doctor more for making the insurance company more profitable..

READ THIS

One place where capitation is the payment method is The Villages Health.

Many studies have documented that the opioid companies gave sometimes enormous amounts of money to doctors who were high writers. It was not that they said, write 10 scripts and we'll give you money. Instead they paid high writers to be speakers at dinners or at conventions etc.

Here is one sentence from the Harvard paper, just looking at 2 years of data:
"The study found that, in 2014 and 2015, opioid manufacturers paid hundreds of doctors sums in the six figures, while thousands more were paid over $25,000."

Funny how that sentence from Harvard says doctors were paid over 100,000 to write opioids, just like the poster wrote that got you outraged. It was not illegal, there were no severe penalties, and whether it is ethical depends on whether the doctors wrote more to get more money or the drug companies picked doctors who were already high users and the payment had no impact [unlikely to have NO impact]

[Robbb]

Most, if not all clinics and hospitals do not allow drug reps to meet with Docs, the days of the bring in lunch for the staff and corner the doc's are over.

[Robbb]

If you really want to get mad, look up the website dollars for doctors. Its an eye opener.