Letters
General medicine
Volume 202 - Issue 3

Pharmaceutical sales strategies and sponsorship

Authors:  Elizabeth Ann Sturgiss, Kirsty Douglas and Stephen Craig Trumble

Med J Aust 2015; 202 (3): 131. || doi: 10.5694/mja14.01525
Published online: 16 February 2015
Drug company marketing strategies are not benign
Download PDF (165 KB)
Share: Share on Blue Sky Share on Facebook Share on LinkedIn Share by email

To the Editor: It is with dismay that we read in MJA InSight Morton's dismissal of the international “No Advertising Please” campaign, citing Australian Medical Association (AMA) policy.1

Drug company sales representatives and their sales techniques influence doctors. Morton dismisses the 2010 systematic review2 through selective quoting of the editorial position. In fact, the editors supported the conclusion of the systematic review that there is no evidence of improvement and some evidence of adverse consequences from marketing. There is an abundance of evidence in the behavioural science literature on the impact of marketing,3-5 and there is evidence that marketers may not make doctors aware of the risks of their products.6

The influence of doctors who are paid by pharmaceutical companies to present research at conferences and workshops is also cause for concern. If we, as a medical community, decline to see sales representatives, will we see an increase in the funding for doctors to present to other doctors on behalf of the pharmaceutical industry?

Many, including AMA leaders, suggest we should continue in the current fashion. We dispute this.

We have the following practical suggestions:

  • front-line clinical doctors, including busy general practitioners, should use the up-to-date, evidence-based information provided by the National Prescribing Service;
  • doctors should obtain further information from authoritative evidence-based clinical guidelines available online, such as “Therapeutic Guidelines”;
  • for future research funding, we advocate structures that more clearly separate the financially vested company from the researchers;
  • conflict of interest statements should be provided beside the authors' names in conference abstract lists; and
  • workshops should provide written disclosure to participants of the presenting doctors' current and previous funding sources.

We support the “No Advertising Please” campaign. We also support further consideration of the insidious influence of pharmaceutical companies at conferences and workshops through their sponsorship of doctors.

Authors

  • Elizabeth Ann Sturgiss FRACGP, FFCFM(RCPA), MPH1
  • Kirsty Douglas MD, FRACGP, DipRACOG1
  • Stephen Craig Trumble MD, FRACGP, DipRACOG2
  • 1. Australian National University Medical School, Canberra, ACT.
  • 2. University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC.

Correspondence: elizabeth.sturgiss@anu.edu.au

Competing interests

No relevant disclosures.

Acknowledgements

We thank David Harley, Christine Phillips, Mieke van Driel and Claire Harrison for intellectual input and support.

References

View this article on Wiley Online Library

More like this

General medicine Perspective 17 November 2025 Open Access

The CURE Asthma roadmap

Gary P Anderson, Anthony Flynn, Phil G Bardin, John D Blakey, Shyamali C Dharmage, Paul Foster, Peter G Gibson, Adam Jaffe, Alan James, Christine R Jenkins, Sundram Sivamalai, Peter D Sly, Guy B Marks, Vanessa M McDonald, Judy Wetttenhall

View more