Positions of pharmaceutical companies Analysis of the websites of the three world’s largest PCs: Pfizer, Roche and Novartis

I. The context What we need to know before we start analysing PCs websites

I. The context  Pharmaceutical industry is one of the most profitable sectors in the economy  Pharmaceutical companies try to look as if they spent most of their recources on Research and Development (R&D) of new medicines…

… but the reality is very different

Where do they get these profits?

Japan Netherlands USA Source: OECD 2009, Especially in countries …where people are sick and therefore need their medications …and government drug policy is not strict and therefore for example the cost-effectiveness of the drugs is not being evaluated …most of all in U.S.

People are especially sick… …where they are obese

Cancer Alzheimer Heart attack obesity

Obesity (Male, 2010) Source:

Overweight (Male, 2010)

Mean BMI (Male, 2010)

…which is the result of the fact that people in U.S. eat way too much fat, sugar etc. 0,15-0,2 kg: healthy/reccom ended weekly portion 1,5-2 kg: US average

Goveronments are not strict… …where drug policy is not strict, e.g. where various pharmacoeconomic approaches to evaluation of cost-effectiveness of medications are not being used, for example where 1. Patients can choose, direct marketing (US) 2. Physicians have large freedom, reimburesemt decisions are not driven by pharmacoeconomics (little use of generics)

Therefore I will analyze 1. PCs position towards health promotion 2. PCs positions towards drug policy

II. PCs Positions towards health promotion

1. Pfizer  Tries to look as if it very much promoted health promotion  Directly in „Products section“ under the heading „Learn and live longer.“ link to organization that promotes healthy diet: „Infoaging, an acclaimed web site from the nonprofit American Federation for Aging Research (AFAR), is dedicated to providing the knowledge we all need to live longer, healthier lives. Visit

1. Pfizer  On its website reports about its support to patient organizations which promote healthy lifestyle Amigos En Salud® (Friends in Health) Pfizer’s Commitment: To support community-based peer health educators specifically trained in behavior change strategies and in disease states. Balance It Out® Pfizer’s Commitment: To support community-based peer health educators specifically trained in behavior change strategies and in disease states as well as communities wishing to embrace healthier food choices and a more active lifestyle.

1. Pfizer  Evidently tries to impress the visitors with explicit examples of its responsibility  Which may even persuade some people despite the fact that Phizer spends much much more money on marketing of its products (TV commercials)=opposite of health than health promotion

2. Roche  Healh promotion not really mentioned  Roche is also diagnostics company => mainly secondary prevention mentioned  Supports mainly patient organizations which educate to/help to patients live with their illness

3. Novartis  directly on the homepage link to Diaseases and conditions page:  „Knowing more about different diseases and conditions will make it easier for … to take a more active role in keeping you and your family healthy.“  „To help you learn more, we have listed links to pages with helpful information on different diseases and conditions.“

3. Novartis  Supports patient organizations which  both help patients live with illness  and engage in health promotion  Although it admits that it tries to influence patients (to consume their products) through patient groups (but pretends to be neutral) „we share balanced, accurate and easy-to-understand scientific information on diseases, treatments (where permissible by law) and health policies impacting patients“

III. Positions towards drug policy

1. Pfizer  Openly admits that self-interest – few restrictions on drug prescriptions – drives its political activities: „Essential aspects of our business are being challenged by barriers to access …. For this reason, we actively participate in public policy dialogues to explain our perspectives“

1. Pfizer  admits financial support to politians who promote Pfizers interest „when choosing to make a contribution to a candidate, the Pfizer PAC considers candidates' views on issues that impact Pfizer and its employees as well as the presence of Pfizer facilities or employees in the candidate's district or state.“ „support candidates from both political parties who share Pfizer’s vision and values for healthcare“

2. Roche  Tries to look as neutral as possible  Does not admit any involvement in drug policy in ways that would promote Roche’s interests „Topics such as research and development of pharmaceuticals, innovation in healthcare, or access to health care are high-priority issues and pharmaceutical companies provide only one part of the solution. Claim that information from Roche shall not encourage patients to ask their health professionals to prescribe a specific product. Furthermore, Roche does not ask or encourage patient groups to promote its products and services.

3. Novartis  Tries to look neutral  but does not hide its opposition towards:  health technology assesment  obligatory prescribtion guidelines (physians should choose)  Use of generics

Conclusion  Pfizer, Roche and Navartis employ quite different strategies when communicating their positians towards health promotion and drug policy

PfizerRocheNovartis Health promotion intensively presents its support does not pretend to support supports partly Strict drug policy openly admits opposition tries hard to look neutral cautiously admits opposition General strategy of communication of self-interest admits openlyhides as much as possible admits partly Codenamethe American model the European model the hybrid model Conclusion