Pharma has clearly succeeded in pulling the wool over the eyes of the public. Has Pharma succeeded in doing the same with pharmacists?
John Abramson, M.D., has been one of my heroes since 2004 when his first book “Overdosed America” was published. Unfortunately he is NOT the hero of a lot of pharmacists. As I explained in detail in my book “The Shocking Truth About Pharmacy: A Pharmacist Reveals All the Disturbing Secrets,” a very large number of pharmacists do not like people who write books critical of Pharma.
Pharmacy is different from a true science because we as pharmacists have a strong financial incentive to not question the dominant narrative in our profession--better living through chemistry. Criticizing pills is bad for business. A pharmacist who uses his position in chain drug stores as a platform to promote reform in the pharmaceutical industry is seriously jeopardizing his employment.
In my opinion, very many chain store pharmacists view pharmacy more as a business than a science. I believe you are naive if you view pharmacists as akin to skeptical scientists who have no horse in the race. We make our living by selling pills, not by encouraging people to learn how to prevent illness.
I’m now retired but I worked in chain drug stores for my entire career. Chain store pharmacists feel subtle yet powerful pressure from our corporate bosses to be positive about the pills we dispense. Besides our financial interest in downplaying adverse effects of drugs, there’s the psychological conflict (cognitive dissonance) resulting from trying to juggle the need to be positive about pills with our knowledge that many pills are a double-edge sword. Unfortunately the balance has tilted too far in the wrong direction because of a hugely powerful and corrupt pharmaceutical industry.
Pharmacists seem to believe that the products we dispense are based on science when, in fact, most are based on marketing. Pharmacists are dispensing the products of an industry that routinely engages in lies, distortions, and magical thinking.
Pharmacists increasingly play the role of legitimizing Big Pharma’s products which are, in fact, quite often clouded by very serious concerns such as FDA’s becoming a captive of the drug industry, Big Pharma’s immense clout over the US Congress, and Pharma’s corrupt influence over drug research.
The public’s definition of “safe and effective” is clearly vastly different from the FDA’s definition. This leads to a reality in which commonly prescribed drugs are often linked to tumors and cancers in lab animals (read the Carcinogenesis and Mutagenesis section in the labeling). Black box warnings are too often added to the labeling years after the FDA approved a drug. Drugs are withdrawn from the market due to safety issues that were not discovered in clinical trials.
The FDA is clearly not the watchdog that the public expects and hopes. The FDA represents a clear example of “regulatory capture.” That’s a situation in which an industry that is supposed to be regulated by a governmental entity ends up controlling the regulator. The governmental entity (FDA) which is supposed to guarantee the safety and effectiveness of drugs has in reality been captured by the pharmaceutical industry.
Sixty-five percent of the FDA’s drug regulatory budget comes from Pharma through user fees. According to an official FDA publication (“FDA At A Glance,” U.S. Food & Drug Administration, Office of the Commissioner, Nov, 2020), “Human drugs regulatory activities account for 33 percent of FDA’s budget; 65 percent of these activities are paid for by industry user fees.”
The public is not told that this leads to a situation where FDA employees might feel that they work for or are beholden to Pharma rather than the American people.
In my opinion, this explains why the FDA approved the Alzheimer’s drug Aduhelm despite the fact that 10 of 11 advisory committee members voted that there was insufficient evidence to demonstrate the drug slowed cognitive decline. (The 11th panelist voted “uncertain.”) Three members of the panel resigned as a result.
In my experience, pharmacists are often far less enthusiastic about pills in private conversations with close friends and family in comparison to discussions with pharmacy customers in the drug store.
On the one hand, every day we see a drug circus on TV with Pharma’s annoying, scary, exploitative, and misleading commercials. At the same time pharmacists dispense these pharmaceuticals as if they’re entirely untainted by corrupt commercial interests and purely based on science. Pharmaceuticals are a ridiculous marketing circus on TV but somehow they immediately transform themselves into miraculous remedies in drug stores and doctors’ offices.
To what extent are pharmacists willing accomplices of Pharma’s corrupt practices? And to what extent are they unwitting dupes of Pharma? Have pharmacists been willingly led down the garden path by a nice paycheck? Should pharmacists be shouting from the rooftops that there are many drugs we dispense every day that we’d never take ourselves or recommend for a close friend or family member?
Pharmacy customers don’t know about the settlements (sometimes in the hundreds of millions of dollars) by drug companies for lying and deceptive advertising. Pharmacists seem to act like every drug we dispense is as important and effective as insulin.
Even the manufacturers of insulin, one of the true superstars in the pharmacy, have managed to cloud the halo surrounding this miraculous drug by price gouging. There are very few companies that manufacture insulin so it is ripe for price gouging.
Should pharmacists have a duty to tell customers that a drug they’re taking is currently the target of a class action lawsuit? Should pharmacists investigate and then tell customers what the yea/nay votes were from the FDA advisory panel that voted on approving the drug?
Pharmaceuticals are depicted in magazine advertisements and in TV commercials as if they are all monumental breakthroughs like insulin and penicillin. These ads portray what looks like safe and easy pill solutions for every medical problem. Then everything suddenly becomes much more complicated when information is presented regarding potential adverse effects, warnings, precautions, contraindications, drug interactions, etc.
Most pharmacists seem to be blissfully unaware of and uninterested in books that expose Pharma’s lies, distortions, myths, exaggerations, etc. When pharmacists become aware of those books, they often react with hostility.
One would think that popular pharmacy magazines like Drug Topics and Pharmacy Times would feel it is important to discuss momentous books like John Abramson’s “Sickening.” But the fact that these magazines receive most of their revenue from Pharma advertising means that pharmacists will likely not be aware of books critical of America’s pill circus.
Pharmacists sit passively at in-person continuing education seminars funded by drug companies. Pharmacists don’t ask whether the medical condition being discussed can be prevented by non-drug approaches such as dietary and lifestyle changes rather than by the sponsor’s drug. Indeed, most of the prescriptions pharmacists that fill are for preventable diseases of modern civilization. That’s one of the facts that Pharma most wants to keep hidden from you.
Pharmacists don’t seem to realize the role we’re playing in legitimizing Pharma’s marketing circus. The public probably assumes pharmacists and physicians would blow the whistle if Pharma strayed too far from truth and reality. But, in my opinion, the fact that the prescribing and dispensing of pharmaceuticals facilitate a nice standard of living for health professionals guarantees that most of them will not bite the hand that feeds them.
Pharma refuses to acknowledge how miraculous, wondrous and magical Homo sapiens is, or, for that matter, all living things and all life forms. Pharma will never admit that humans are part of the natural world. Pharma promotes the idea that the human body can be completely understood in terms of chemistry and that people, therefore, need chemical solutions for everything.
We should all laugh at that self-serving and simplistic view of health. We should also laugh at modern medicine’s completely mechanistic and reductionist view of the human body. Modern medicine is, in reality, the monetization of the maladaptation of Homo sapiens in modern society.
The activity of filling proscriptions is mind-numbingly boring and monotonous. It primarily consists of transferring pills from big bottles to little bottles. But the job is extremely stressful in dangerously understaffed chain drug stores because of the potential for making a serious mistake (such as dispensing the wrong drug, typing the wrong directions on the label, overlooking a serious drug interaction or contraindication, etc.), and thereby harming someone.
For many chain store pharmacists, the only nice thing about their job is the salary. In my experience, pharmacists’ top two concerns are their salary and having enough technician assistance on hand. Concerns about the safety and effectiveness of pharmaceuticals are far down the list of pharmacists’ concerns.
Many pharmacists rationalize to themselves that the prestige of modern medicine proves that concerns about drug safety and effectiveness are exaggerated. Pharmacists seem to view their salary in comparison to that of, say, dietitians and nutritionists, as proof that pharmacy is a more important field than nutrition.
Because capitalism rewards pharmacists more than dietitians, pharmacy must therefore be more important than nutrition and more valuable to society. But clearly capitalism wants profits far more than health. Our medical system is about profits, not health.
I hope every pharmacist reads John Abramson’s “Sickening,” but I think that most pharmacists are simply not interested in a critique of the pill business, as long as the status quo provides a nice paycheck.
It is extremely uncomfortable for pharmacists to entertain the possibility that very many of the drugs we dispense are not nearly as “safe and effective” as the FDA claims. Therefore there’s not much hope that pharmacists will be critical of Pharma. “Sickening” provides an extremely important perspective that most pharmacists are not eager to consider or talk about.
Pharmacy would be a much more fulfilling profession if the importance of John Abramson’s perspective were widely acknowledged and practiced. John Abramson is one of my heroes for speaking the truth. I wish he were also the hero of very many pharmacists. Pharmacy would then be a much more honest and gratifying profession.
Dennis Miller, R.Ph., is the author of “The Shocking Truth About Pharmacy: A Pharmacist Reveals All the Disturbing Secrets.”