Opinion

Myth vs. Reality: The American healthcare system needs a makeover. That requires policies based on accurate information about how our country’s system compares to others’. To start, we must separate fact from fiction.

Critics of the pharma industry have gotten good at selective reporting. So good, I've started tuning out. But, with a public official pulling similar punches, my ears can't help but perk up.

I feel vulnerable to accusations that I work on the dark side, that I've sold out to corporate medicine.

California has proposed legislation for a pilot program to reinforce access to treatment for mentally ill offenders. This is a step in the right direction, but it should be the subject of national policy, not a localized effort.

I've just returned from Europe, where I spoke with various think tanks, thought leaders, and pharmaceutical companies on the issue they call "information-to-patients" (ItP). That's what we on the other side of the pond refer to as direct-to-consumer communications. In Europe, they choose to abstain from using the "A" word-advertising. But rhetoric counts. "Information to patients" seems quite paternalistic when compared with the new-worldly "direct-to-consumer" moniker.

High-deductible health plans go against the goals of employers, pharma, and the public.They don't reduce out-of pocket drug costs.

Attacking articles in medical journals, those ghostwritten by professional medical writers paid by pharmaceutical companies, is the media's latest attempt to taint anything supported, promoted, or approved by Big Pharma.

Often, post-approval marketing studies don't materialize because drug companies question their value. Independent review of the need for such studies would address pharma's concern that they may be warranted.

PhRMA Guiding Principle number 10 calls for the banishment of reminder ads. While there are many reasons why drug ads truly advance the public health, there are no good arguments for why reminder ads advance public health in any way.