This blog contains posts and comments written by students in Dr. Tufte's economics classes at Southern Utah University.
3/21/2007
Doctors, Drugs, and Money
For close to ten years now there has been discussion regarding doctors and the drugs they prescribe. Topics range from investing in certain pharmaceutical companies to receiving payment from drug companies to promote their product. These issues have become more heated in recent years with publicized research that indicates doctors are prescribing new and pricier drugs for their patients according to an article in the New York Post . The same drugs that the doctors have a vested interest in through some sort of financial benefit from the drug companies to the doctors. Drug companies state “In the end, patients are well-served when technically trained pharmaceutical research company representatives work with health care professional to make sure medicines are used properly.” This sounds like a fancy way to skirt around the issue of conflict of interest. Where is the doctor’s responsibility, legally or morally, to prescribe for patients a cheaper but just as effective drug that reaps no financial benefit to the doctor. I believe the drug companies should have a responsibility to NOT increase the costs of prescription medication (which effects the patients) in order to cover the ‘side’ payments to the doctors to prescribe those same pills.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
This seems sensible.
On the other hand, we have completely eviscerated the incentive for doctors to judge marginal costs and benefits when it comes to patient care. This means that they don't know how big a legal liability they face if they prescribe a cheaper medication end then get sued.
Interestingly, college cheerleading teams are a prime source of "fresh meat" for the pharmaceutical companies representatives. The University of Kentucky is particularly known for this.
Dr. Tufte said:
"On the other hand, we have completely eviscerated the incentive for doctors to judge marginal costs and benefits when it comes to patient care. This means that they don't know how big a legal liability they face if they prescribe a cheaper medication end then get sued."
I think it's interesting how many doctors complain about the thousands of frivolous lawsuits that cause malpractice insurance to be very high (and I agree with their complaints), yet we see some doctors who ignore legal liability issues by prescribing drugs that aren't necessarily the best for a particular patient. It makes one wonder why it's even legal for doctors to receive kickbacks for prescribing certain drugs. Doctors should be in the business of helping patients, not pharmaceutical companies.
Dr. Tufte,
I find it interesting that doctors do this. In all my years I have never had a doctor tell me to get the name brand prescription; rather they always tell me to get the stuff over the counter or the cheaper version. Obviously this is a problem if some physicians are prescribing the more expensive drugs. There must be some ways to counteract these problems. What methods we should use to stop this, I have no idea.
It's pretty common William. I think a good way to combat this would be a public campaign emphasizing that there isn't any difference between generics and the real thing.
Post a Comment