Lawmakers seek transparency in doctor-drug industry relationships
Toolbox
By Daniel Barlow Vermont Press Bureau - Published: December 23, 2008
MONTPELIER Some lawmakers are envisioning a future where Vermonters can type in a doctor's name into an on-line database and see exactly how much if any money they receive from the pharmaceutical industry.
For several years now, the Vermont Attorney General's Office has issued a report detailing the amount of money those in the medical field receive from the pharmaceutical industry. But that report is criticized for not being complete or user-friendly.
Now, key lawmakers say they want to see changes to the law that set up that reporting system, including stripping a trade-secret exemption that allows the industry to keep secret the amounts of money and identities of doctors they give to.
"I think Vermont should be a leader in full transparency so that consumers can know whether or not their doctor has one hand in the pot," Senate President Pro Tem Peter Shumlin, D-Windham.
The report issued by the Attorney General's Office this year showed that the medical industry gave $3.1 million in gifts and donations to Vermont doctors and institutions, an increase of about 33 percent over the previous year.
But that report does not contain all the names of doctors or organizations receiving the funds including names of the 11 medical professionals in Vermont who alone received $630,000 from the industry in 2007.
Rep. Anne Donahue, R-Northfield, said increas-ing the transparency and accessibility of the gift reporting system would help instill confidence in consumers that their doctors' recommendations are based on sound health practices and not the influence of the money given to them by the industry.
Right now, the reporting system tends to cast "false, unbiased suspicion" on the whole field including doctors and medical professionals who say no to the offers of gifts and money from the pharmaceutical companies, Donahue said.
"When Vermonters hear that doctors got hundreds of thousands of dollars in gifts, that tends to have a negative impact," she said. "But for all we know that could be a single doctor taking in a lot of money for medical research."
Shumlin said he envisions changes to the state law that would only allow the pharmaceutical industry to keep secret very limited information, such as donations to support academic research.
Otherwise, all that information should be available and easy to obtain, he said. It would be as simple as setting up an on-line database on a Vermont state Web site that could be used by the public.
Shumlin added that he believes the influence of the pharmaceutical industry has led to an increased reliance on mood-altering drugs as an answer to a child's mental health problem. Psychotropic drugs should be an option, he said, but too often they are seen as an easy solution to a complex problem.
"I think we will look back at this era of drugging our kids as a dark moment in medical treatment," Shumlin said.
A call to the Vermont Attorney General's Office was not returned Monday.
Lawmakers looking to change the pharmaceutical donation reporting law have some strong support from advocates in the field. The Vermont Medical Society and the Vermont Psychiatric Association have endorsed many of the changes that have been discussed.
Paul Harrington, the president of the Medical Society, said Monday its membership recently voted to support legislation that would increase the transparency of this information.
"We look forward to working with Sen. Shumlin and others to eliminate the trade secrets exemption," Harrington said.
Ken Libertoff, the executive director of the Vermont Association for Mental Health, a Montpelier advocacy organization that began refusing industry donations last year, said he is worried there is an "escalating trend" of money given by the industry to doctors and other professionals.
Libertoff said he supports the changes to the reporting law being discussed, adding that the trade secrets clause hasn't allowed Vermonters to get a full picture of the interactions between doctors and the industry.
"Our position is that they don't need the money," Libertoff said.
The Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, the organization that represents pharmaceutical companies, has vowed to fight any effort to strip the trade secrets clause from Vermont's law.
In a statement released Monday evening, PhRMA Senior Vice President Ken Johnson said that clause and others like it protect sensitive data from being released and help retain a company's marketing edge. It often allows companies to be competitive with others, he said.
"Proposals to revoke trade secret protection could violate federal laws that protect fair trade practices. A federal court has said that when governments compel disclosure of marketing information and fail to protect trade secret data, it amounts to 'an unconstitutional taking of property' because the information has been publicly disclosed or disclosed to competitors," Johnson said.
Contact Daniel Barlow at Daniel.Barlow@timesargus.com.
39