Letters to the Editor
-
Quacksilver
I am pleased to see Brook200 and Prairiefire and a few other have revealed the extremely poor and transparent arguments of Dr. Parikh. To avoid undue repetition, I'll confine myself to Dr. Parikh's basic premise that vaccines do not cause autism since the victim in this case was "predisposed" because of underlying "mitochondrial disorder". Well, Dr. Parikhit, it goes without saying that the child has to be predisposed for autism in some manner for the vaccine to be a (contributing) cause of it, otherwise we would all be autistic wouldn't we?
Here is an excerpt from a neat little article that expands on the relationship between vaccine manufacturers and your even friendlier than Dr. Parikh MD:
"The thought police documents are part of a trove of confidential internal Merck marketing strategies demanded by Congress to determine how sales of Merck's last big blockbuster, Vioxx, continued to skyrocket in sales long after evidence of heart attacks and strokes emerged. The documents reveal an Orwellian marketing concept that goes like this: a team of "Specialty Representatives" gather intelligence on every aspect that motivates influential doctors in their assigned territories. Once this information is developed, these Merck intelligence officers narrow the data down to the key "drivers" of "beliefs and behaviors," then provide inducements to turn the doctors into "Advocates" for Merck products.
Merck has a revealing lexicon for this intelligence gathering and inducement strategy: influential doctors are called "thought leaders," and defined as doctors who, "due to their ability to influence their peers, drive therapeutic business at the national, regional or local level."
The goal is clearly stated: "Understanding a thought leader's needs will assist you in developing a strong relationship with him/her and it will enable you to properly manage that advocate to create win-win situations for both Merck and the thought leader."
But not all thought leaders are created equal in the Kafkaesque world of Merck. "Once you understand the factors driving a thought leader's beliefs, behaviors, needs and patient management approaches, you'll want to determine their sphere of influence...These spheres of influence can be used to help you determine how to best manage a thought leader. There are three different classifications...Local Thought Leaders...Regional Thought Leaders...National Thought Leaders."
The National Thought Leaders are the jackpot for the thought police because they may "be driving the treatment approaches and methods on a national level" and "Typically, a national thought leader influences physicians at all levels across the nation." Once the thought leaders have been studied, categorized and prioritized, the Merck thought police are to: "Determine how to interact with the thought leader; determine what activities the thought leader is best suited; how to best manage him/her based on this information."
Inducements to bring the thought leader on board as a Merck "Advocate" run the gamut of education grants, free travel to symposiums at resorts, a prestigious assignment as a clinical site investigator or a spot on the Merck Strategic Advisory Board.
Taken as a whole, the marketing plan attempts to provide strategic inducement to create a more sophisticated and influential extension of Merck's salaried sales force. That the public relies on its doctors for unbiased and unvarnished medical advice appears to be of no consequence to Merck.
And Merck is hardly alone. Industry watchers estimate that the pharmaceutical industry spends over $12 Billion a year under the dubious heading of marketing to doctors."
http://www.opednews.com/maxwrite/page.php?a=32919