Envisioning 2.0

I am pleased to announce the launch of the first comprehensive global study of healthcare bloggers, the “Taking the Pulse of the Healthcare Blogopshere” survey. The poll, which is co-produced by my firm Envision Solutions, LLC and The Medical Blog Network, is the first systematic attempt to gather comprehensive opinion and demographic data from the global community of healthcare bloggers. Please click here to read a press release about the survey.

Some key facts about the survey:

- The 2006 edition of the survey will run from July 31 to September 29. It is open
to individuals and organizations that devote at least 30% of their blogging time to healthcare-related topics. To learn more about the survey, please click here.

- Envision Solutions and TMBN will release the preliminary results of the survey in the late fall. The final results will be presented at Healthcare Blogging Summit 2006 taking place in Washington, D.C. on December 11.

- Envision Solutions and TMBN will collect and analyze data provided by a global sample of healthcare bloggers willing to take the survey. While the data is expected to provide new insights into the attitudes and behaviors of this community, we acknowledge that we may be surveying the most active bloggers and caution against applying the data to the overall healthcare blogopshere.

I hope that readers of this blog focusing on healthcare will take the time to take the survey and post about it on your Weblogs. The more respondents we gather data from, the stronger the survey.

Thanks and please feel free to contact me with any questions about the study.

Healthcare blogs provide physicians, health policy experts, patients and others a forum  to engage in spirited dialouge about the important medical issues of the day.  Anyone looking for proof of this should  read the commentary posted on Kevin Pho’s blog, Kevin, M.D. on the recent arrest of physician Anna Pou.  Pou is accused of murdering patients under her care during Hurricane Katrina.

Click here to read Pho’s post and the commentary it inspired.

In an article published in yesterday’s Boston Globe, Stephen Smith points to pharmaceutical company sponsorship of supplements in medical journals as an example of the growing influence of drug firms on medical treatment. Smith tells the tale of a how a new guideline embracing CT scans for heart disease received the “seal of approval” from a major medical journal, the American Journal of Cardiology. To boot, guideline development was funded by a number of drug companies. Is this yet another example of the hidden ties between drug companies and researchers? I think not. Here’s why:

- Readers of supplements are informed that they are sponsored

- The authors of the guideline acknowledged that the data supporting their recommendations are sparse

- The journal did not endorse the guideline. It simply provided a forum that the authors used to communicate their point of view. Most know that supplements are generally supported by some faction, have a distinct bias and contain content that ordinarily wouldn’t survive the peer-review process.

In this case, the Globe is barking up the wrong tree. There was full disclosure — no one was trying to hide anything. One may frown upon journal supplements, but publishing them does not rise to the level of medical mischief.

Please click here to read the article.

[Via Kevin, M.D.]

Today’s Washington Post has an interesting article about race and medicine. In the article, researchers talk about the differences within black populations in health status and disparities.

As it turns out immigrants of African descent arrive in the US with better health status than African Americans. However, over time these differences narrow. Researchers are concerned about the data and struggling to explain this shift in health status.

Read the Washington Post article by clicking here.

Is the FDA moving to head off federal legislation that may more tightly regulate how the FDA manages membership on its advisory boards?  This may be the motivation behind a recent announcement that the FDA is drafting new rules governing how it will exclude scientists with ties to industry from the panels that help it decide whether to approve medications.

The new FDA guidance will virtually ban any physician that has participated in a marketing campaign for a pharmaceutical company from participating on its advisory boards.  Scientists that have received support through an academic institution will be granted waivers.

See this New York Times article for more.

An article appearing in today’s New York Times reveals that FDA officials waged an internal battle over the approval of the antibiotic Ketek.  Senator Charles Grassley, a critic of the FDA’s relationship with the pharmaceutical industry, said the conflict indicates that the FDA has “made it their business to discredit Dr. Graham and others who aren’t willing to cater to the drug companies.”

I will touch on the issue of antibiotic drug safety in the next installment of my ongoing series: “The FDA and the Pharmaceutical Industry.”

In my latest series, “Examining The Issues: Disease Mongering Or Saving Lives?,” I have been focusing on issues relating to Big Pharma’s sparse drug pipeline and efforts to market new medications. In today’s New York Times, Pfizer’s head of R&D, Dr. John L. LaMattina says that the research fortunes of his company are changing and that the industry is at the cusp of a new golden age of drug discovery. He rebuts critics who are saying that drug companies focus on marketing at the expense of drug discovery.

On another note, is this article a sign that industry is increasing its emphaiss on highlighting the benefits of drug discovery in an attempt to draw attention away from its controversial marketing tactics? This issue is covered in the latest edition of my firm’s quarterly newsletter, Envisioning. Click here to read the article. If you like what you read, please subscribe by clicking here.

A few weeks back, I reported that influential medical blogger, Medpundit had exited the blogosphere.  Well, it turns out that she’s decided to return.  Welcome back!  I’ll be adding her back to my RSS feed library post-haste.

The latest edition of the Health Wonk Review is up at The Healthcare Economist.  I forgot to send in a submission this round, but will get mine in early for the next.

This article is part one of an ongoing series inspired by the Seattle Times special, “Suddenly Sick.” The Times’ series examines how the pharmaceutical industry promotes medications for a range of conditions, including hypertension and obesity. Click here to read “Suddenly Sick.”

Read the rest of this entry »