Kolach 1

Jessica Kolach
Mr. Rogers
Government, period 4
October 17, 2016
Mock Congress Research Paper
Have you ever had a doctor recommend you viagra? Probably not, unless you happen to
be an adult male over the age of sixty, in which case according to the CDC there is a 63% chance
youve gotten the recommendation despite only 17% of men actually needing it (Health, United
States, 2015 - Men's Health.), why? Because of big Pharmas sales representatives.
Pharmaceutical sales representatives have direct access to medical professionals and doctors.
This relatively recent development in the relationship between big pharma and the health sector
has had a clear impact on the quality and quantity of prescription drug habits and health care to
the point where it has become harmful to the American consumer. Through perks, retreats, meals,
and even direct bribes, sales representatives are able to influence the prescribing habits of
doctors in favor of whatever corporation they have thrown away their ethics for. Pharmaceutical
representatives giving financial aid to doctors and medical professionals causes them to over
prescribe, choose certain medications that were created for another reason, and prescribe more
expensive, brand name drugs.
Over 100,000 people have died yearly from doctors over prescribing medication. Thats
one person every five minutes. A ProPublica analysis has found that doctors who receive
payments from the medical industry do indeed prescribe drugs differently on average than their
colleagues who don't (NPR). ProPublica is a non-profit organization that provides investigative
journalism for the benefit of the public. In 2010 alone, Americans spent more than $16 billion

Kolach 2
on antipsychotics, $11 billion on antidepressants and $7 billion for drugs to treat attention-deficit
hyperactivity disorder (Inappropriate Prescribing). Four out of five times, the prescriptions for
antidepressants, antipsychotics, and other psychiatric drugs are written by doctors with little to
no psychiatric background. But, Pharmaceutical representatives push these drugs the most
causing them to be the second most commonly prescribed drug in the United States. A majority
of these prescriptions are unnecessary and only prescribed because pharmaceutical
representatives give doctors financial aid. In 2004, pharmaceutical companies spent an average
of $10,000 per practicing American physician on free meals, free continuing medical education
(CME) training, free trips to conferences, and payments for various services, according to data
compiled by IMS Health, a company monitoring the industry's finances (Study Affirms
Pharma's Influence on Physicians). What Pharmaceutical Representatives are essentially doing
is bribing doctors and medical professionals to have them prescribe the medication that their
company has created or is backing. Not only do Doctors over prescribe certain medications, they
sometimes are not giving completely accurate information and prescribe the wrong medication
for a certain diagnosis.
Some pharmaceutical companies trick doctors into selling medication that was created for
another reason in an attempt to boost sales. To make more money, companies give financial
incentives to doctors and exaggerate the effects of drugs. One such example would be:
Pharmaceutical giant AstraZeneca will pay $520 million in fines to settle charges by the federal
government that it illegally marketed the antipsychotic drug Seroquel to children and elderly
patients for uses not approved by the Food and Drug Administration (Drug Giant AstraZeneca
to Pay $520 Million to Settle Fraud Case). AstraZeneca has had multiple scandals involving
false marketing of drugs. The drug was created for treatments of schizophrenia, bipolar mania

Kolach 3
and bipolar depression but Astrazeneca marketed the drug (generally by bribing doctors) for a
variety of illnesses for which it had never been tested, including aggression, Alzheimer's, anger
management, anxiety, attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, dementia, depression, mood
disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder and sleeplessness. One of Seroquel side effects was
actually depression which is one of the many things pharmaceutical companies and
representatives said it treated. Although the company may be facing financial charges now, the
amount of people that have been used as guinea pigs and given incorrect medication, which
could cause a variety of problems ranging from being more sick to death, cannot be helped.
When drug sales reps come around, they provide studies, but often studies that present their
product in the most favorable view. (When Doctors Prescribe Brand-name Drugs over
Generics, the Taxpayers Foot the Bill) Although this seems like an extremely basic concept,
doctors do not have time to double checks the facts that they are given and often take the
representatives word for it. What that ends up causing is that representatives can avoid certain
side effects and can embellish the actual benefits of the medication. On top of exaggerating the
benefits of medication, pharmaceutical companies can pitch more expensive drugs to doctors and
medical professionals.
Medication has slowly become more expensive for consumers partly because the prices
are rising with the economy, but also partly because pharmaceutical representatives pitch brand
name drugs which essentially means the most expensive drugs available. Pharmaceutical
companies and representatives are able to do this because of the large amount of financial
incentives they give doctors and medical professionals. The goal of the pharmaceutical industry
is to increase its profits, which includes persuading physicians to prescribe more of the most
expensive drugs. Continually rising drug costs are not in the interests of our patient population as

Kolach 4
a whole, and the most expensive or most heavily marketed drug may not be the best prescription
for any given patient. (The Company We Keep: Why Physicians Should Refuse to See
Pharmaceutical Representatives). Taxpayers could save over three-hundred million dollars if
doctors prescribed regular medication instead of brand name medication pushed by
pharmaceutical representatives. Taking Sides, Health and Society 6th edition, says that
pharmaceutical representatives often bribe doctors in different forms and have actually spent
more money on doctors than on funding for research or advertising to the consumers. This shows
that pharmaceutical companies generally care more about convincing doctors to prescribe their
medication than they do creating the best drug for those in need. If pharmaceutical companies
spent more time creating drugs than sending doctors on vacation or buying them dinner, the
medical industry would burst with new advancements.
Many people could argue that representatives provide necessary information that
doctors need to create the best prescription, or that doctors cannot be expected to provide quality
healthcare without being educated on the newest developments. The basis behind both of these
arguments is that pharmaceutical representatives are providing a service to valued, important
members of society that we have a duty to give appropriate compensation towards. Available
evidence suggests nonetheless that information presented by the pharmaceutical industry is
substantially biased in favor of the sponsors product (The Company We Keep: Why Physicians
Should Refuse to See Pharmaceutical Representatives). This would indicate that the necessary
information many people assume pharmaceutical representatives give doctors is not fully
accurate and has many hidden agendas. There is a growing consensus among doctors that
prescribing more expensive brands of reputed companies of which the quality is assured is far
better than prescribing cheaper brands of unknown quality. (Unethical Relationship between

Kolach 5
doctors and drug companies). The problem with prescribing more expensive medication, is that
it is not necessarily the best. Instead of spending their time at conventions and dinners, doctors
could be researching the information given to them or helping other patients. The time it takes
for doctors to go to conventions, would be much shorter if they simply did their own research
instead of relying on others to spew lies into their ears.
Through, retreats, meals, conventions, direct bribes,office supplies and other forms of
financial incentives, pharmaceutical representatives become some of the closest people to
doctors. This friendship is completely strategic and causes a huge impact on the way doctors
prescribe medication. Giving financial aid to doctors and medical professionals causes them to
prescribe medication unnecessarily-such as viagra-, giving companies a small amount of space to
exaggerate the benefits or risks of certain drugs, and the friendship causes doctors to prescribe
more expensive drugs. Although pharmaceutical representatives give some important
information to doctors, they should not be able to give any financial incentive to doctors. In the
early 2000s, music companies were able to pay radio stations to get them to play the songs that
they were invested in. Eventually it became illegal and was surrounded by a lot of controversy.
But today paying radio stations seems odd and unnecessary. Pharmaceutical representatives are
the same as the music companies, bribing doctors to sell the medication they want sold. If
Pharmaceutical representatives were no longer allowed to give any financial incentive to doctors,
they would only be able to share knowledge which would be a huge step in the right direction.
This bill should be passed to allow patients to have better faith in their doctors because they are
truly getting the best medication for themselves.

Kolach 6

Works Cited
Brancacceo, David. "When Doctors Prescribe Brand-name Drugs over Generics, the Taxpayers
Foot the Bill." When Doctors Prescribe Brand-name Drugs over Generics, the Taxpayers
Foot the Bill. Market Place, 18 Nov. 2013. Web. 18 Oct. 2016.

Kolach 7
Brody, Howard. "The Company We Keep: Why Physicians Should Refuse to See
Pharmaceutical Representatives." Annals of Family Medicine. Copyright 2005 Annals of
Family Medicine, Inc., Jan. 2005. Web. 18 Oct. 2016.
Daniel, Eileen L. Taking Sides; Health and Society. 6th ed. Guilford, CT: McGrawHill/Dushkin, 2004. Print.
Das, Sanjoy, Dr., and R.K. Bansal, Dr. UNETHICAL RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN
DOCTORS AND DRUGS COMPANIES Department of Forensic Medicine &
Toxicology, Himalayan Institute of Medical Sciences. Web. 17 Oct. 2016.
Donohue, Julie. "A History of Drug Advertising: The Evolving Roles of Consumers and
Consumer Protection." The Milbank Quarterly. Blackwell Publishing Inc, Dec. 2006.
Web. 17 Oct. 2016.
"Drug-Company Payments Mirror Doctors' Brand-Name Prescribing." NPR. NPR, n.d. Web.
17 Oct. 2016.
"Health, United States, 2015 - Men's Health." Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 27 Apr. 2016. Web. 17 Oct. 2016.
Khan, Huma, and Pierre Thomas. "Drug Giant AstraZeneca to Pay $520 Million to Settle
Fraud Case." ABC News. ABC News Network, 27 Apr. 2010. Web. 17 Oct. 2016.
Miller, John Dudley. "Study Affirms Pharma's Influence on Physicians." Study Affirms
Pharma's Influence on Physicians. Journal of National Cancer Institute, 2007. Web. 17
Oct. 2016.
ProPublica. "Dollars for Docs." ProPublica. N.p., n.d. Web. 25 Oct. 2016.

Kolach 8
Smith, Brendan L. "Inappropriate Prescribing." American Psychological Association.
American Psychological Association, June 2012. Web. 17 Oct. 2016.