It’s surprising how much ink is being spilled over the revised PhRMA code – considering it bans free pens.
Less surprising are the indignant musings of those whose only metric of the code’s “success” is a decrease in marketing efforts. Consider the opinion of Robert Restuccia, Executive Director of the unbiased and entirely unconflicted Prescription Project.
If spending is up, he figures, then voluntary compliance is a failure.
That’s pretzel logic.
The whole issue of whether drug marketing spending goes up or down is a non-sequitor when it comes to PhRMA marketing code compliance. Linking spending to compliance is like linking sunshine to gas prices. No relation at all.
What it does demonstrate is the frustration of Mr. Restuccia and his fellow travelers, who believe that drugs shouldn’t be marketed at all. Those who preach the inadequacy of voluntary marketing codes believe that “compliance” should result in, de minimus, reduced marketing and, ultimately, no marketing at all.
And if you don’t think this is their pen-ultimate goal, it’s time to wake up to reality.
Note to Prescription Project: “Good for sales” and “Good for the public health” need not be mutually exclusive.
Regulation (via voluntary codes or government legislation) doesn’t mean what is being regulated is bad. It means that it needs to be done in a certain way.
And that benefits everyone.
