Skip to content

Doctors on the Dole

According to Pro Publica, the drug companies are doling out millions of dollars to pay doctors to shill their products to other doctors. Apparently, the companies can’t be bothered to check into the credentials of their salesfolks, as Pro Publica found a number of doctors who were either not particularly qualified, or who were distinctly not qualified.

The Ohio medical board concluded that pain physician William D. Leak had performed “unnecessary” nerve tests on 20 patients and subjected some to “an excessive number of invasive procedures,” including injections of agents that destroy nerve tissue.

Yet the finding, posted on the board’s public website, didn’t prevent Eli Lilly and Co. from using him as a promotional speaker and adviser. The company has paid him $85,450 since 2009.

In 2001, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration ordered Pennsylvania doctor James I. McMillen to stop “false or misleading” promotions of the painkiller Celebrex, saying he minimized risks and touted it for unapproved uses.

Still, three other leading drug makers paid the rheumatologist $224,163 over 18 months to deliver talks to other physicians about their drugs.

And in Georgia, a state appeals court in 2004 upheld a hospital’s decision to kick Dr. Donald Ray Taylor off its staff. The anesthesiologist had admitted giving young female patients rectal and vaginal exams without documenting why. He’d also been accused of exposing women’s breasts during medical procedures. When confronted by a hospital official, Taylor said, “Maybe I am a pervert, I honestly don’t know,” according to the appellate court ruling.

Last year, Taylor was Cephalon’s third-highest-paid speaker out of more than 900. He received $142,050 in 2009 and another $52,400 through June.

Leak, McMillen and Taylor are part of the pharmaceutical industry’s white-coat sales force, doctors paid to promote brand-name drugs to their peers — and if they’re convincing enough, get more physicians to prescribe them.

The article makes clear that there’s actually some social good flowing from some of the talks given by some of the doctors that are being enriched by the drug companies. But that’s only because our system is so screwed up that doctors don’t have an unbiased continuing educational system that both operates outside of the present system and reaches the folks in those hard to get places. Enter the drug companies. The payoffs are part investments in duping doctors into using selected drugs, and part direct payoffs to the speakers for overprescribing the drugs in question.

The Health Care act made a dent in this sort of thing, in the typically indirect fashion that present day compromised politicians prefer. Instead of just putting a stop to it, and putting an unbiased continuing education system in place, the government is requiring the drug companies to disclose the payments, strictures they will no doubt find a way around and which, at all events, probably won’t make much difference. The result, no doubt, is increased health care costs and poorer health care, but who cares when you’ve deluded yourself into believing you have the best health care system in the world.

Friday Night Music-Live From Sesame Street

Stevie Wonder


Can’t buy her love

Well, it looks like Linda has peaked and Blumenthal is pulling away. At this point, it seems unlikely that any new attacks will do much good; the folks who were susceptible to them have already been won or lost. One must wonder whether there will come a point when Linda will stop throwing her money around quite so freely. After all, even for her, a million dollars here, a million there, it really starts to add up. My bet is she’ll keep on slogging. The dirt will keep coming, but there’s a real air of desperation about it now.

In any event, it appears that there are limits to what money can do.

It’s always been my belief that Linda is not interested in politics. During the debate that I watched, it seemed that she was rather bored, repeated her talking points sort of listlessly, and had no real interest in policy. She is not a true believer; no Joe Miller she. She doesn’t want to destroy the government, or improve it. Had the circumstances been different, she would have been happy to run as a Democrat. Policy is beside the point. She was interested in buying a Senate seat for much the same reason some folks buy English titles. She is and always will be just another grifter in this year of the grifter, and she figured buying her way into the Senate would confer respectability and prestige.

Money can buy a lot of things, and had things turned out differently (and who knows, they still might) Linda might well have been our next Senator, despite the fact that she doesn’t give a rat’s ass about the state or the people in it. But all things being close to equal, money’s not enough. If you’re unable to forge any connection with voters, if you project complete indifference about them, and if you make it clear that you are going to get their votes by buying them, a surprisingly large number of those voters will turn away from you, particularly if you also inundate their mail boxes with trash. Money can buy a lot of things, but it can’t buy love, and for Linda, it turns out that it can’t buy prestige or respectability.

A glimmer of hope in a world gone mad.


Brilliant Billboard

I spent all day writing two briefs, and my mind can’t cope with the idea of writing anything else of substance. So, in case you didn’t see it on My Left Nutmeg, here’s a brilliant billboard that thousands of people are passing each day on I-95.

Says it all, doesn’t it? Blumethal definitely owes the responsible folks a beer.


Conceding the Frame

Barney Frank sent me an email the other day. He was warning me about a “right-wing, pro-life group”.

It never ceases to amaze me. The Democrats alway seem eager to let the Republicans frame the terms of debate, constantly ceding the rhetorical high ground.

I can understand why the Republicans want to call themselves “pro-life”, but for the life of me I can’t understand why the Democrats, or any group that supports abortion rights, let them get away with it.

I tried to do a little research on Google to find out whether the Republicans return the favor by calling abortion rights advocates “pro-choice”, an appellation that in any event is far less rhetorically appealing than “pro-life”. I didn’t get very far,but did see a surprising number of links to articles in which it was urged that a group should be allowed to call itself whatever it wants, and its wishes should be respected. Bizzarre thinking, when examined just a bit.

In this particular case, we are dealing with a group of people who come with a package of beliefs. These days the right is fairly monolithic. You aren’t a member unless you goose step to one drum. They are not pro-life. They are against providing health insurance to all those babies they insist must be born. That is not pro-life. They are for the death penalty. That is not pro-life. They support every imperial war a Republican president cares to launch. That is not pro-life. They resist every effort to save the planet from the coming global warming catastrophe. That is definitely not pro-life. They are, in fact, for the most part, quite definitely pro-death, providing always that it’s someone else doing the dying. Yet Barney and far too many of his compatriots on the left help them win the PR wars. Truly amazing.

Fair and Balanced

Since it’s my local paper, I feel compelled to take note when the New London Day’s coverage is skewed.

Case in point. A week or so ago Scott Brown came to the state to stump for Linda McMahon. Brown is yesterday’s news, as anyone paying attention would know. They could have held the rally in the Groton Library’s meeting room, with room to spare. The crowd was estimated to possibly exceed 200, if you counted the press.

The Day covered the story on page one, with a huge picture of Linda on that page, and with the story extending over onto page three. Who knows how many words per attendee, but the point, in case you’re obtuse, is that these were tea party people, or allegedly so, and therefore worthy of prime time coverage, despite their paltry numbers and non-existent brains.

Yesterday Michelle Obama came to the state to stump for Dick Blumenthal. People were lined up to get in to see her. Despite the prevailing memes, she is not yesterday’s news. But these were not tea party people. They weren’t crazy, and therefore, apparently, they’re not interesting, despite their superior numbers and functioning brains. The Day deigned to put a tiny teaser picture on page 1, directing the reader to an article buried on page B5. Even the Boston Globe gave the story more prominence. It’s pretty reminiscent of the total lack of coverage for our side’s demonstration in Washington earlier this month.

I should hasten to add that I’m not pointing a finger at the reporters who wrote these stories. They don’t decide where their stories will run, or how much prominence to give a picture. The Day has, unfortunately, and for whatever reason, taken a rightward editorial tilt, and this is just one small example.

Values

Sometime today I read a blog, or a news article, or something, in which it was observed that the now further compromised Rob Simmons (link) was unable to use Linda’s WWE connections to make a dent in Linda’s support during the primary season, yet it seems that her checkered past is having a substantial negative effect on her during the regular campaign.

This can only mean that Republicans are perfectly comfortable with simulated sex, with both living and dead bodies, and violence against, and degradation of, women, while Democrats and Independents take a dimmer view.

But how can this be? Don’t Republicans have a monopoly on “values”? Don’t they own religion, motherhood and the flag? Shouldn’t they, more than anyone, be repelled by someone who makes her money exploiting sex and violence? Yet, here is proof positive that they care about these things less than the unclean.

A real mystery, though there are some who might be able to come up with about 50 million reasons for this bizarre turn of events.

Groton City Dems Honor Liz and Paul Duarte

We just returned from a lunch honoring Liz and Paul Duarte for their many years of service to the Groton Democrats, both City and Town. Liz has been chair of the Groton City Democrats, president of the Groton Federation of Democratic Women, a member of the Groton City Council, and is presently our local representative to the State Central Committee. I know I’m leaving lots out, but the titles don’t really tell the half of it, in any event. Liz is one of those behind the scene workhorses that are responsible for getting people elected, particularly in the close ones. She works hard and selflessly in every election and this one is no exception.

Paul is a former member of the City Council and is a former and/or present member of the RTM. I confess I’m not sure. He’s also active in a host of community organizations. A number of politicians came out to give them citations, including Susan Bysiewicz, State Representative Tom Reynolds, who gave them something from Richard Blumenthal, and Groton’s own State Representative, Ted Moukawsher, seen here with Liz and Paul.


I also must mention that Liz and Paul were there from the start when we began our Drinking Liberally meetings, and have been pretty regular in attendance.

Friday Night Music-Twin Bill, No Bagpipes

Yes, that’s right. After two weeks of bagpipe themed musical extravaganzas, we’re back to real music. Last week, after finally finding the Rare Air video with the jazz bagpipes, I started free associating on youtube, and had a good night. I’ve got a bunch of 60s stuff stockpiled, and this week I’m featuring two. The first is from the Ed Sullivan show, so it’s a real live performance, despite the psychedelic lighting. Vanilla Fudge doing You Keep Me On Hanging On.

By contrast, this next one is anything but live, but how could I resist the great go-go girls? What were we thinking back then? Maybe we really were getting too many kicks. Anyway, here’s Paul Revere and the Raiders, with some conserva-rock, I guess you could say. No one listened to the lyrics anyway. I’m guessing Paul and the Raiders didn’t, in any event. This was the band, by the way, that Dick Clark hoped would supplant the Beatles.

Not great music, but good fun.


The last of a dying breed

Yesterday’s Mystic River Press contains a front page article about the State Senate race in the 18th District between Andrew Maynard (D) and Stuart Norman (R, sort of). Andy and Stu have decided to eschew name calling and campaign through a series of joint appearances. (The Mystic River Press is not on line, so no link and you’ll have to trust me on the quote.)

Maynard, the incumbent, said the two candidates bumped into each other a few weeks ago at a legislative brekfast for real estate agents. They discussed the possibility of campaigning together with a courtous exchange of ideas and “kind of ratchet[ing] down the demonizing.”

Referring to his opponent as a “fine gentleman,” Maynard said that he and Norman are committed to a respectful exchange of ideas. Their debates would be marked by thoughtful discussions, and not name calling, he said.

Stu and I go pretty far back. He was a year ahead of me at Bowdoin, and I can attest that he has definitely risen in the world, or at least in esteem, being that he was a member of Beta Whatever Whatever, the animal house on campus, which means he had a way to go to become a fine gentleman. Which, I hasten to add, he most definitely is. He was also a year ahead of me at UConn Law, but as I have no particular sentimental attachment to that institution, I will let that pass.

I’m afraid their discussions will not only be civil, but also rather boring. In the world of Republicans, Stu is a wild eyed leftist. (I’ve told him on more than one occasion that he’s really a Democrat. I believe he’s even married to one) In the world of Democrats, Andy is a tad on the conservative side, at least fiscally. In other words, I don’t think they’ll disagree on much. Stu is the last of a dying breed, a rational person in a party gone mad.

So, despite the civility and our shared Alma Mater, there’s no way I’ll be voting for Stu. To both paraphrase and mangle the Bard’s Brutus, as he was superbly educated, I rejoice at it; as he has integrity, I honor him, but as he is Republican, I will not vote for him.