Dr. Rost provides services as a pharmaceutical marketing expert witness. For more info see: Drug Expert Witness. Dr. Peter Rost email. Copyright © 2006-2013 InSync Communication. All rights reserved. Terms of use agreement, privacy policy and the computer fraud and abuse act.


Peter Rost, M.D., is a former Pfizer Marketing Vice President providing services as a medical device and drug expert witness and pharmaceutical marketing expert. Judge Sanders: "The court agrees with defendants' view that Dr. Rost is a very adept and seasoned expert witness." He is also the author of Emergency Surgery, The Whistleblower and Killer Drug. You can reach him on rostpeter (insert symbol) Please read the terms of use agreement and privacy policy for this blog carefully.

Pfizer Vice President: Our Image Stinks

The Scotsman writes that a senior Pfizer executive has admitted the drugs industry suffers "crippling cynicism" from the public about its motives and the huge profits it makes.

"Jack Watters, Pfizer's vice-president of medical and regulatory affairs for Europe, Latin America, Africa and the Middle East, said drugs companies were partly to blame because they have failed to promote the positive contributions they make to society.
Films such as The Constant Gardener, based on a fictional novel by John Le Carré, helped perpetuate the idea that drugs companies put profit above everything else, he said. "

Sounds like yet another delusional corporate officer.

Tip: It doesn't take more "spin" to improve pharma's reputation. People know you make drugs that save lives. They also know you don't do this out of the goodness of your hearts. And they know that when you have a choice between doing the right thing and making money, not even half of your own employees think you'll do the right thing. Now that may take a bit more than "spin control" to change. You may actually HAVE to change.

Bummer, right?

This bright Pfizer spokesperson continues: "I don't think anyone in this world has the moral authority to decide what a reasonable profit is and what's not."

And of course this is what he thinks. After all, when the top ten drug companies made more money than all the other Fortune 500 companies combined a couple of years ago, this was as it should. And if one drug company could make more money than all the other companies in the entire world, this is of course also OK. At least if you are a drug company spokes person.

Hat tip: PharmaGossip


Anonymous Daniel Haszard said...

Eli Lilly 3Q 10% profit rise is nearly all from psyche drugs including zyprexa.How have they schemed to squeeze more money from their zyprexa cash cow when pill production has actually gone down?

ANS-Eli Lilly profiteers have jacked up the price of zyprexa to the federal govt,from the Medicare D payouts.Eli Lilly is a big drug company that puts profits over patients.

They covered up findings that their Zyprexa has a TEN times greater risk of causing type 2 diabetes

Only 9% of Americans trust big pharma,right around the same rating as tobacco companies.

Daniel Haszard Eli Lilly zyprexa drug caused my diabetes

Blogger beeta said...

I come here and scan your posts, and go to comments, as you said before " the best part of any article is in the comments".
The last 5 or so posts have 1 comment each.
So like any logical person, I go back and look to see which article got more than 1 comment.
21 was the highest comments any article got recentely, and the article had "self starting" animation with a semi naked woman (usually you have to push a botton to get the animation started, this one got going before one had the chance to get ready)in the lead role.
Now, I have nothing against semi-naked good looking women, but I draw the line at them speaking ooohhh so softley...and intimateley to me, when I have not had a chance to scrutinize them and decide wetheter I even want to hear what they have to say.
So, I feel .....kind of .....well...annoyed!
First, I am not a fan of semi naked good looking women talking to me as if I was a man ( I am not...duhhh)
second-why does a semi-naked woman get 21 comments on a site that talks about "abuse of Pharma lobby and the cost it entails on the American public"?
Third-what happened to having logical/honest/prudent exchange of "real" ideas?
Fourth- It seems I am not the only one of the "old crowd" who is not commenting a bunch on the new subjects posted here!
Last- Would like to hear what my old buddies (the old bunch ) have to say!
Best wishes to all!

Blogger Argon said...

Well it does reinforce the topic of the post since it was about what doctors and others pay attention to right? So it deserves to have the most comments on the page.

I don't know about you but I thought I made some good points about "real ideas" especially the ones regarding Pavlovian conditioning which seem to be what doctors respond to (and others that read the comments here apparently *wink*) instead of what they're supposed to be professionally trained in.

I commented on the inclusion of his book in the library since I thought that was a great step to getting a wider audience for it and about the dating mess since I was just thinking about that subject.

The others I wasn't much interested in, especially the ones about "Brass Balls" I suppose you could say he has them in risking his career, but it's a relative thing compared to others.

Steven Colbert showed them a lot more at the White House Correspondents dinner I thought. And Christopher Plummer even more in that movie "Must Love Dogs" when he brought 3 different dates home for Thanksgiving Dinner.

I like reading a variety of posts on different subjects but I don't always feel the need to comment on all of them.

Blogger Peter Rost said...

Well, seems like they all commented on the post with the semi-naked woman.

I'm just as suprised as you are. I wasn't sure if I was going to put it in, but it did make a good point? Clearly everyone thought it was a very important point!

Oh, and I note that you call a woman dressed in what every woman is dressed in on a beach, essentially a bikini, semi-naked.

Isn't that just a tad prudish?

And yep, I couldn't make that video not start by itself, so I have since disabled it.

Sorry about that, rest of you!

Blogger beeta said...

But see, if you choose to to go to the beach( here in the US most beaches aren't nude) you not only expect to see women in bikines, but you are at least going to be prepared for it. Has to do with "choice" which is totally different than being "ambushed".
I am pretty sure that the Male readers are perfectly happy with the visuals, however; the obejection remains.
Regardless of gender, and the finer arts of sexual pleasure, are we or are we not talking about abuses of power and previlage by people (Pharma) in high places?

Blogger beeta said...

Again, going back to msmelody's comment on war on terror,and the very good question she raised, is it ethical to use half-naked women to get 21 comments in an environment where each post gets usually 1 comment?
And more the point, is it not what you, Dr. Rost, are alleging what the Pharma big boys are doing to entice Doctors to buy what they are selling?
And how exactely your posting of half-naked women to solicite 21 comments differ from their practices?

Blogger Moogirl said...

Beeta said:

"...why does a semi-naked woman get 21 comments..."

I think you answered your own question girl! I too did not like the fact that she started all by herself, but only because she startled me a couple times when I’d accidentally left my speakers on. She also made the page drag a bit. The only other thing that annoyed me about her was that she was a dimwitted trollop.

And Doc, I’m sorry, but she was half nekked, as are most women on the beach. Nothing prude about that, but when you’re wearing the equivalent of a bra and panties, you are technically half nekked.

And I thought we were having a logical/honest/prudent exchange of "real" ideas, right up until the time we got silly with all the car comparisons.

But you have to figure that any thread that generates a lot of comments is going to naturally flow onto other subjects, just like a real conversation does. You often see a conversation take a different turn because you start to comment on others comments, which can lead you away from the original topic.

And then there are those of us who are just plain silly and who show up for sheer entertainment purposes only. But I’m not naming any names...

Blogger beeta said...

Public Notice!
These are rantings of a frustrated reader past midnight! No need to take offense!..This too shall pass!
A note on the very funny cartoon!
Moogirl had it right!
W does eat paste (he pretends it's chewing tobacco while he is clearing brush)!
And the brush is on his left hand which is just for show, if you notice his right hand is smeared with ink, which suggests he has been finger painting!

Blogger Moogirl said...

I don’t think the Doc consciously posted the trollop to generate comments (maybe he did but I doubt it). The girl was a drug rep, and a hootch, I thought that was the whole point of the post. I thought the whole point was that she and her ilk are the reason you and I get prescribed certain drugs, because some tart was pushing them, and as Argon so aptly pointed out, the blood can only rush to one head at a time and gravity always wins!

THAT’S what these women are, Doc, pretty pushers!

Anyway, to accuse the Doc of using her to elicit more comments, get real. She was a half nekked, gorgeous woman. I doubt he needed much more incentive than that.

Remember, gravity...

Blogger beeta said...

Again, after midnight rantings are to be left where they start, but on the subject of "prudishness"...well..
semi-naked women aren't my cup of tea, but totally naked good looking guys "purring" softly next to me are!
"prude" is not what he calls me, I am pretty sure!
Objection remains!
I do not come here to see (in cinema-scope) how exactely Doctors are lured! I have a pretty vivid imagination!
Leave it to my imagination, if that was the intent.
If on the other hand the intent was to get 21 comments......

Blogger Moogirl said...

Beeta you are such a hoot when you're sleep-deprived!

Don't you think he'd post semi-naked hootches all the time if he were only doing it for the comments?

You know when we crab about naked women he always post naked men for us. Perhaps this is YOUR intent!

Oh you sly, sneaky, woman!

Blogger Argon said...

Giving away all her trade secrets eh? No doubt she stole it from Shakespeare "Methinks the lady doth protest too much"

I figured I had address that issue when I changed my profile image because I was having to repeat myself in comments, I noticed I haven't had that problem since *wink* Whatever works right?

Blogger MsMelody said...

Sorry, folks--but to get back to the issue . . . Daniel (commenter #1) addresses the lack of trust Americans have in Big Pharma. He also states that Eli Lilly's drug Zyprexa CAUSED his diabetes. Why isn't that information headline news . . . a pharmaceutical company CREATING disease that closely aligns with their core market--diabetics.

Now, Lilly pimps can prescribe Zyprexa (is that bi-polar or schizophrenia treatment), suspecting that they will create a new DIABETIC, with all the attendant income that condition will produce. Additionally, since diabetics have been shown to suffer from a higher-than-average rate of depression, they have also created customers for that good ol' standby--PROZAC.

But, frankly, this isn't about creative marketing. It is about INTENTIONALLY harming patients under the guise of treatment. Have they NO shame???

Blogger MsMelody said...

Just opened my e-mail and a friend had sent the following link that addresses this situation quite handily. (The first few graphs are provided so you can decide whether you want to read more or not.)

Lilly at center of sepsis uproar
October 19, 2006
Some NIH doctors claim company used funds to influence guidelines for treating blood disorder

BOSTON -- Several government doctors say drug maker Eli Lilly and Co. subtly orchestrated medical guidelines for treatment of an often lethal blood infection, hoping to boost sales of a drug whose value is being debated.

Such involvement could open another door to corporate interests trying to shape health care, beyond funding experiments and cozying up to doctors in labs or at luncheons. Guidelines are meant to reflect independent medical opinion.
"This company is trying to insinuate its drug into many aspects of patient care that industry really shouldn't be involved in," said Dr. Naomi O'Grady, a critical care specialist at the National Institutes of Health.

Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Oh, and I note that you call a woman dressed in what every woman is dressed in on a beach, essentially a bikini, semi-naked.

Isn't that just a tad prudish?"

I think all women should stop wearing bikinis to the beach, at least or until, all men start wearing speedos.

Blogger Argon said...

I know a lot of men that shouldn't be caught dead wearing speedos. One that springs to mind is Nick Toturo, when he wore one on Celebrity Fit Club last season, even Harvey had to threaten him never to do it again.

Anonymous Anonymous said...

"I know a lot of men that shouldn't be caught dead wearing speedos."

This is always the first retort I get when suggesting men should be held to the same skimpy beach attire standard as their female counterparts. Which only further exemplifies the double standard and demands on women to maintain a more fit form in general terms. In lieu of speedo, it's perfectly acceptable for men to wear huge, baggy, hanging past the knee trunks exposing naked swollen sagging breasts, protruding midsections, and plenty of butt cleavage. Let's level the playing field - declare all nude beaches, all the time.

Blogger Argon said...

I'm all for that since it actually does level the playing field, becaue when everyone is fully naked it makes it unremarkable than when certain parts are packaged and called attention to. It's just going back to the natural state of things which would be a lot healthier

But that's not likely to happen as long as repression has it's hold on the country and denial of the "naughty bits" is still fragmenting the perspective of the morals where people say one thing in public then does another in private

Blogger MsMelody said...

of the morals where people say one thing in public then does another in private


Certainly, you are NOT talking about politicians, are you!

Blogger Argon said...

Certainly they're some of the worst offenders of it, second only to televangelists like Jim Bakker, and Jimmy Swaggert.

If they would give up their hypocritical repression and delusional denial they would be a lot healthier.

That kind of cycle of denial, repression and projection wastes a lot of energy and does a lot of damage in framenting parts of your psyche and alienating then to be feared as enemies.

Blogger Moogirl said...

No speedos for anyone, anywhere, at any time, ever!

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Actually, I am not really interested in semi/half/whatever naked women; definitely not.

What I would like to comment is what Jack Watters said. It sounds very much like him, and, on the other hand, it like the company he is working for. But, Peter, can you answer me this one question: how the hell did they make him speak so, let's say, decent, politely, well educated, ...? That, actually, is NOT Jack.


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home