Wednesday, September 15, 2010

Meeting with Pharmaceutical Company Corporate Counsel Next Week

The doctor is the real customer for prescription medications. The doctor can also get legal standing  by buying a share of company stock. Such ownership would allow the doctor to intervene when a company is about to make a mistake detrimental to the interest of the doctor and of the patients.

I hope the attorney will allow recording of the meeting so it may be posted here.

Here are some areas of concern.

1) Most of the enforcement actions of the DOJ on behalf of the FDA have been of mala prohibita, with no evidence of any harm to patients.  Off label promotion most often benefits patients. If it can be shown to have helped some patients. Therefore they are pretextual (false) uses of the law to raise revenue for the government. These prosecutions should get enjoined as a matter of policy to protect research, the interests of patients, and the independence of street clinicians to help patients.

2) Why not attack the prosecutor, the FDA officials, the whistleblowers, and the judges? They are mortal enemies to clinical care and deserve no human consideration. Personal destruction should be a standard price paid by all enemies of clinical care. It can start with total e-discovery of their personal and government computers. As a start, the government is the biggest subscriber and downloader of child porn. The prosecutor will say, these images are part of his job. Sure. That is what all perps say. Let him explain them to the FBI. Every utterance should be parsed for a violation of a professional rule of conduct and reported to the appropriate investigatory authority. Let these enemies of clinical care undergo perpetual state of being the target of an investigation. Such a tactic in the past resulted in the end of a long line of lawsuits, the exit of the lawyer from that field, and the experts never testifying again.

3) Off label use and promotion is the biggest source of undiscovered medical advance at no additional cost. If a company is accused of such, it should ask the judge, to dismiss the case as a matter of policy. Such prosecutions deter the massive lode of medical advances yet to be mined.

4) Black box, class warning labels not applicable to a member should be resisted to avoid the deterrence of the non-specialist.

5) The campaign against industry sponsorship of continuing education, sandwiches, pens, etc. is not driven by misguided, crazed left wing ideologues. It is driven by evil insurance companies. They want to end the prescribing of brand name medications to dark skinned people on Medicaid, to enhance the profitability of their government contracts. Senator Grassley, on a witch hunt against drug companies is a paid stooge of Blue Cross/Blue Shield. When people write to persuade me to switch to obsolete medications. I offer to come over, and to give these medication to their pets. They refuse. So, why would I should feel pressure to switch to a generic when these are not acceptable for use in animals?

6) I may buy a share of stock in every pharmaceutical company. That would give me standing to file an intervention claim every time a phony settlement is agreed upon. These settlement hurt the shareholder and the public interest. They should be blocked on policy grounds and any prosecution enjoined.

7) I propose the establishment of a public interest interest law firm funded by $million each year from each pharmaceutical company. It would sue the enemies of clinical care, and hound them, including the bureaucracy. It would campaign to hobble and eliminate the FDA, as an obstacle to medical progress.


  1. Dude, for real, you got issues, and it's beyond medical matters.
    I can understand your issues with the Blues, they are the biggest assholes with the most power and they abuse that power at every turn.
    But that is the only thing that makes any sense.
    Calling what you say as over-reacting is far too mild.
    You're nearly foaming at the mouth.
    Truthfully, you're downright scary.
    Ghandhi freed India with non-violence, it's a good read, everything isn't a battle to win.
    Bet you're afraid of a communist take over too.
    Oh, and for the record, being poor is not a choice, it's never a choice, it's forced upon much of the world in order to maintain those who are rich. After all they have to have servants and they must have someone else's back to stand on. If not, who could they feel superior to, if not the poor? The poor are the scapegoats for all the ills of the wealthy.
    Not even the insane choose to be poor.
    Get real, take your money and buy a vowel and get a clue.

  2. Personal remarks show frustration in a debate.

  3. "Oh, and for the record, being poor is not a choice, it's never a choice, it's forced upon much of the world in order to maintain those who are rich."

    Oh, and for the record, in the US, being poor is a lifestyle choice. Say, one has an IQ of 50, and no skills. With a little help, one can get all the cleaning work one can stand, do overtime, be a taxpayer, and have 95% of the lifestyle of Donald Trump. Trump would have more pretty things, but not more useful things.

    Now refuse to help or please others, and one will be poor.