Question

Topic: Career/Training

How Are Medical Products Different From Others?

Posted by Anonymous on 500 Points
Hello everyone! Here's my brainstorm:

When it comes to marketing pharmaceutical drugs in general, what in your oppinion, makes these products different?

1. The first obvious difference is- needs a third party's authorization. Other than weapons, which require (but rarely enforced) a third party's authorization, are there any other products that need authorization by third party before being able to purchase?
Should that effect marketing considerations?


2. The second: mis-usage can be harmfull. OK, but that could be also correct for non OTC products - asprine, cigarettes, and even plain good old diet drinks or hamburgers. Right? or wrong?

Are there any other prominenet differences? How should those effect the branding mix?

I would appreciate any of your very brainy input

Thanking you in advance for your time

Turqize
To continue reading this question and the solution, sign up ... it's free!

RESPONSES

  • Posted by Deremiah *CPE on Accepted
    Turqiz my sistah,

    very interesting thoughts and questions. To comment on your number (3) I think that although manufacturers have proven their reliability regulation should not allow them to execute marketing and branding publicly as they see fit. The problem is the "as they see fit part". I think without proper regualtion at least here in the US where capitalisim rules over the spirit of "Loving thy neighbor as you love thy self" manufacturers will run rough shod over the general public. My concern is because of the nature of the industry and in particular drug addiction. The ability to create habit abuse is a great reason to misuse the marketing & branding part of the equation.

    TURQIZ>And how about the end customers: those who actually do the swallowing - shouldn't they be allowed to use their common sense and discretion?

    I wish we all could say that the end users often know how to apply common sense and discrection but I'm not sure if most people really know how to apply either on a consistent or accurate basis. Common sense is so open for interpretation that this alone poses problems. I heard someone say "Commonsens isn't all so common" in our world. Furthermore the liability aspects of the health industry in general would create an on slaught of new law suits. There are so many factors that impact this last question that I think leaving discretion open to peoples interpretation would just be opening up a giant size can of worms. Is there anything else I can do for you?

    Your (Brother), Deremiah, *CPE, (Customer Passion Evangelist)

    PS
    (Curing Pharmaceutical Errors)
  • Posted by Mushfique Manzoor on Accepted
    hi turqiz

    great response from all the experts. My opinions and observations regarding this……..

    apart from the two differences you have pointed out that differentiates pharmaceuticals from others is the marketing practice (from my country perspective)…….

    Usually, Apart from non-OTC drugs the marketing activities are all directed to the purchase influencers/decision makers. the drug company has to market the drug to the physician who is prescribing the drug to the patient. so its that physician who is the purchase influencer and, in case of 3rd world countries, decision makers as the patients insists for the same brand at the pharmacy.

    in Bangladesh, the drug market is highly regulated and not even OTC drugs are allowed to be promoted to the end users, rather to the physicians. despite that gone are those days when the Drs prescribed generic names, rather they today precribe drugs by the brand name. and thats where the drug company emphasize on marketing. the marketing activity of the drug makers are directed more towards getting the physician "hooked" with their drug at any cost rather than talking more about scientific terms.

    earlier the drug companies used promote drugs with small promotional materials, now they are offering incentives in kind (as u cant legally provide cash for prescribing ur brand) which most of the time borders the legal boundaries. Drug companies devise systems through which they calculate how many files of their brands have been prescribed by a certain Dr. and if that Dr. meets his agreed targets s/he gets the monetary/kind benefits from the drug maker. This is irrespective of the actual efficacy of the drug to cure the ailment.

    Another interesting aspect is the drug makers are not content enough to “hook” the physicians for driving sales of their drugs. Drug makers are also “hooking up” pharmacies, in the same manner of physicians, to drive their sales. And both this practices are not only followed by local drug makers but also MNC drug makers.

    then again there is the issue of skimming off more than 100% to 200% profits by MNC drug makers in 3rd world countries for many of the drugs. The Anti retroviral Drug (Anti AIDS) case of South African is an example. is it ethical to make such profits for drugs/products which are meant to save people's life.

    Differing from what deremiah mentioned, its almost impossible to think of end users using common sense for buying a drug in 3rd world countries in Asia, Africa as still in most of the cases physicians’ advise are strictly followed in the said regions.

    Under these circumstances who are to blame, despite the fact that many of the countries have apparently strict drug rules and administration.

    An interesting and thought provoking topic.

    Cheers!!

Post a Comment