Pharma and social media….examples of why it’s risky

SELCS_Writing_Labs

A couple of weeks ago I came across a fascinating piece describing Facebook’s decision to insist that Pharma companies allow commenting on their Facebook pages.

The article raises some interesting questions about social media, and being responsible for the content, including that entered by others (e.g.comments on a page). 

I urge you to read the article, and leave a comment below. What are your thoughts? Is this a good thing or not? Should Pharma be held responsible for content created by others when that content is just a comment?

Here’s the link to the article: http://www.emoderation.com/facebook-tells-pharma-brands-they-must-allow-comments

And here’s one that discusses Pharma and Pinterest:
http://www.fiercebiotechit.com/story/visual-web-cautionary-note-pharma-about-pinterest/2013-07-15

See you back soon…

  • Top 5 pharma marketing trends in 2014
  • Why Pharma Marketing is Boring? Archetypes!
  • “This Is How We’ve Always Done It” – A Phrase of the Past in Pharma?
  • Gamification in Pharma Marketing explained with examples
  • Can pharma innovate?
  • Pharma Should Embrace Social Media Despite Regulatory Limbo, Hurd Says
  • Visual web: Cautionary note for pharma about Pinterest

Pharma 3.0

What follows is a post that I recently published on AIIM’s site as an “Expert Blogger”. (The original can be read here)

———————————————————————–

Pharma 3.0

When I first heard the term “Pharma 3.0” I thought that it was the latest in the trend to put “x.0” (where x = 2, or higher) after everything. I was delighted to find out that it wasn’t, and there is a (reasonably) well-defined “Pharma 1.0, and 2.0”.

To get to “Pharma 3.0”, we need to detour past Pharma 1.0, and 2.0.

To bring a pharmaceutical drug to market is not something for the faint-hearted. There are strict regulations that need to be complied with. The length of time taken to bring a drug to a point where it can be sold can be up to eight and a half years, or longer. And the cost can add up to more than US$800 million.

As a result, pharmaceutical companies rely on a “blockbuster” drug. Which is one that alleviates, or cures, specific problems, and for which there is a high demand.

This is what defines “Pharma 1.0” –  the age of the “Blockbuster”.

However, Pharma companies also realized that there is more than just having a “really great product”. “Pharma 2.0” is a period where there was a recalibration to do business leaner, nimbler and more focused on emerging realities. Effectively, the focus was on redefining the business model.

There are no precise dates when the next “Pharma x.0” period is entered, but “Pharma 3.0” has started to emerge.

Pharma 3.0 can be described loosely as “Pharma + Web 2.0”.

That is, “social media” plays a big role.  The advent of social media has brought a voice to the end consumer. With a greater wealth of knowledge at their hands, the patient has become more knowledgeable about their ailments, and more critical of the medicines they are taking. Insurance companies and governments are also now starting to look for real value in the medicines that they are paying for, rather than just relying on the claims of the pharmaceutical company.

As a result, the pharmaceutical company has had to redefine who the “customer is”. No longer is the customer the Medical Doctor. Now more focus is put on delivering real value to the patient.

And this is where social media, and related technologies, are coming into play. Companies are starting to identify ways that they can not only “talk to the customer”, but to also “listen”. Examples include smartphone apps that provide information on the medication that a patient is taking, allowing them to ask questions directly to the pharma company, or to get in touch with others using the medication; apps that give patients easy ways to record treatments and keep track of the symptoms they experience; through to devices that measure the blood glucose levels of a patient, and then transmit them to a mobile device where the data can be stored, and shared with a physician. (InPharm maintain a great list of apps currently available. Click hereto see it). Initiatives include, also, more transparency, and information to both the patient and the doctor.

“Pharma 3.0” is about adding value by empowering the patient. And it’s something that the pharma companies are all involved with (in one way, or another). The newer, more dynamic pharma companies that are appearing in places such as Asia, and India, are able to put into place the business partnerships and innovation required to fully take advantage of Pharma 3.0. The tradition Big Pharma companies, however, are burdened with an “entrenched” value network that needs to be changed. This is happening.

It is likely that, in the current year, there will be quite some activity in this area. I’ll be watching with interest.

Reference Material:

Progressions report, 2010 – Ernst & Young

Progression report – 2011 – Ernst & Young


Big Pharma and the Prisoner’s Dilemma

 

medicine

Today I downloaded and read a McKinsey Quarterly report entitled “A wake-up call for Big Pharma” (see link at end of this post).

It was a fascinating, insightful report.

It pointed out several changes that are taking place that are going to force a pharmaceutical industry that has been luxuriously wallowing in easily made profits, and relying on mergers and acquisitions to promote growth, into having to seriously considering radical changes that, if not self-imposed, would be forced, through the actions of smaller, more flexible companies that are hungry.

The authors of the report (Vivian Hunt, Nigel Manson and Paul Morgan) used the “Prisoner’s Dilemma”, from Gaming Theory, to describe the current situation with Big Pharma. That is – if no-one changes, all the Big Pharma companies continue to enjoy the same “wealth”, where if one of them was to make a radical move to adapt itself to a certain future, it would risk, for itself, a potential loss of market share to the others (albeit a temporary one). At the same time…if none of them make a change, the inevitable will be a future where their hands will be forced.

The conclusion of this is that, regardless, there is a fundamental shift on it’s way and that Big Pharma Executives need to be prepared to make changes to their strategies, explicit, rather than reactive.

Related Links:

  • McKinsey Quartely – “A Wake-up call for Big Pharma” (registration required)
  • The Prisioner’s Dilemma (Wikipedia)
  • The Prisoner’s Dilemma (Library of Economics and Liberty)
  • Big Pharma: sorry, the Golden Age is over! (scienceintelligence.wordpress.com)
  • Big Pharma’s Uncertain Future (Strategy + business)

Social Media and Pharma Industry, a Paradoxical Oxymoron?

The following is an article that was originally posted on PharmaIQ.

The author is Cristina Falcão.

=================================

The world’s most highly regulated industry seems doomed to “forward retreat” tiptoeing into social media. Why? The reason lies on social media’s gist – user generated content (UGC) is the raison d’être but also the main drawback, since the lack of rules on the accuracy of online content (written by the users of websites such as Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn) makes pharma accountable.

Effective guidance, equally issued by the EU and US drug agencies, is urgently needed, before pharma companies can use social media’s valuable contribution in areas such as pharma-vigilance, clinical trials, R&D, and employee- recruitment.

What is the current guidance situation?

Unlike in the US, the European Directive 2001/83 (Community Code) forbids public advertising of “prescription-only medicines”. On the other hand, EU offers little specific guidance on social media (apart from some EFPIA -guidelines on websites, and the PMCPA’s (UK) “Brief guideline on blogs”), and waits for the US approach; however, FDA rules on pharma, internet and social media, which draft was due at the end of 2010, still have not been issued.

Major concerns

Pharma companies are responsible for the contents of a sponsored website (sponsorship can simply be advertising); yet, it is virtually impossible for the industry to control a website’s UGC without undermining the dynamic nature of social media. Adverse events reporting (AER) is a nightmare: the law states pharma companies must report all those events to the respective regulatory agencies, where they are stored in databases to monitor drug safety. It is impossible for the industry to monitor all AER’s, and marketers fear that user-generated content will include complaints about their drugs’ side effects; what makes it even worse, is the fact that FDA’s databases are regularly searched by lawyers for potential class-action suits.

Nevertheless, there are many pharma companies using Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and other social media tools; the only way out, is to monitor activity on any social media platform where they are present, using disclaimers, reserving the right to remove unwanted comments and redirecting drug questions to the company’s website.

Clinical trials

Patient-recruiting for clinical trials through social media, grants decreased R&D costs to the industry. However, clinical trials have several types, designs, and sample groups; social media, alone, is not the universal source. It can prove to be a double-edge sword, if patients interact and exchange information before the whole trial is completed; also it does not ensure evaluable data in the end. Patient- recruiting outside the physician’s own pool of patients has high dropout rates; tweeting about a clinical trial may build awareness of the opportunity, but does not guarantee an engaged PI, who will lead the patient through the clinical trial, thus assuring collection of meaningful data.

Although ‘social media’ is the overhyped buzzword of our time, for pharmaceuticals it will be a treacherous route: regulations will undoubtedly limit (further) interaction with the public, but increase accountability – it not being worth the effort or risk.

All we know for sure is that the debate has only started.

 

Click on this image for the original post

 

===================

Related Posts:

  • Will Pharma Ever be Able to Fully Embrace Social Media?