…sometimes, all one can do is stand in awe. "Head of Healthcare and Key Opinion Leader Management." It sounds like a riddle, "If a Key Opinion Leader is Managed, can it still be called an Opinion?" Amazing…
Sounds good to me. Why not request a few free samples of Roche’s Accutane and all your troubles may be over. Solve all your problems with a few Accutane pills, a rope, a knife: whatever it takes for the escape of an Accutane-induced death.
Don’t know that I find Alto’s “Sorcerer’s Apprentice” analogy entirely apt. I see it more as when a superpower has for a time a vested interest in a regional conflict. They pour resources into those regional players who have congruent goals and beliefs. Even once the superpower pulls back those particular players have an entrenched power base. Certain psychiatrists gained a lot of money and power over the years from their relationship with pharma. Many of those psychiatrists would have held their same current beliefs had pharma not fueled them financially (both personally and professionally.).
Many of them would not have their same current level of influence.
What happened to the psychiatrist who decided to publicize the data on one of the other paroxetine depression trials that was negative despite the company not wishing him to do so? What was his name again?
To beat a dead horse: To this point, Dr. Ryan’s and Dr. Martin’s (and by extension AACAP’s and JAACAP’s) handling of Study 329 have enhanced their brand. NOTHING that has been done to this point has posed a threat to the value of their brand with a constituency they care about.
When their peers in child mental health “remember Study 329” that is probably what they remember best.
That’s interesting, Annonymous. I am convinced that the psychology of the Cold War and the fact of the power of rulers to commit total global annihilation over a difference between the opinions of two sets of mythologized men and the systems that only resemble their ideologies, are still how the elite perceive the us and thems of life and how to control us.
How Soviets used psychiatry to threaten and contain dissidents and how psychiatry is used in the U.S. to control people who are failing to adapt to the MBA schema of “productive” person-hood have more in common than either would want to admit. At the very least, drugs are indispensable in both approaches when dealing with hearts and minds that just can’t or won’t mold themselves into the prevailing model of what a “healthy” person is.
Sounds good to me. Why not request a few free samples of Roche’s Accutane and all your troubles may be over. Solve all your problems with a few Accutane pills, a rope, a knife: whatever it takes for the escape of an Accutane-induced death.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2253526/Acne-drug-deaths-Did-miracle-drug-Roaccutane-drive-precious-children-suicide.html
“So, to sum up, pharma can provide you with a platform to increase your network, enhance your visibility and strengthen your personal brand. As a physician, you are THE critical component to pharma’s marketing and sales outlets. Know your value and use your influence wisely. It entirely depends on you if you are the ball or the player in the pharma marketing game.”
http://www.medcrunch.net/pharma-marketing-101-two-things-pharma-needs-from-you/
http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2012/08/doctors-key-opinion-leader-social-media.html
Beautifully put.
Don’t know that I find Alto’s “Sorcerer’s Apprentice” analogy entirely apt. I see it more as when a superpower has for a time a vested interest in a regional conflict. They pour resources into those regional players who have congruent goals and beliefs. Even once the superpower pulls back those particular players have an entrenched power base. Certain psychiatrists gained a lot of money and power over the years from their relationship with pharma. Many of those psychiatrists would have held their same current beliefs had pharma not fueled them financially (both personally and professionally.).
Many of them would not have their same current level of influence.
What happened to the psychiatrist who decided to publicize the data on one of the other paroxetine depression trials that was negative despite the company not wishing him to do so? What was his name again?
To beat a dead horse: To this point, Dr. Ryan’s and Dr. Martin’s (and by extension AACAP’s and JAACAP’s) handling of Study 329 have enhanced their brand. NOTHING that has been done to this point has posed a threat to the value of their brand with a constituency they care about.
When their peers in child mental health “remember Study 329” that is probably what they remember best.
This is corrosive and ongoing.
Perhaps someday that will change.
That’s interesting, Annonymous. I am convinced that the psychology of the Cold War and the fact of the power of rulers to commit total global annihilation over a difference between the opinions of two sets of mythologized men and the systems that only resemble their ideologies, are still how the elite perceive the us and thems of life and how to control us.
How Soviets used psychiatry to threaten and contain dissidents and how psychiatry is used in the U.S. to control people who are failing to adapt to the MBA schema of “productive” person-hood have more in common than either would want to admit. At the very least, drugs are indispensable in both approaches when dealing with hearts and minds that just can’t or won’t mold themselves into the prevailing model of what a “healthy” person is.
I agree, Annon, the client state analogy has appeal.