In the latest effort to break up the often cozy relationship between doctors and the medical industry, the University of Michigan Medical School has become the first to decide that it will no longer take any money from drug and device makers to pay for coursework doctors need to renew their medical licenses.
Just another reason why UM is unequalled
I mean no disrespect to the good people in the pharmaceutical industry, but I believe that the farther away we get from the subject line the better off we'll be.
This has long been a source of concern on their part as potential conflicts of interest.
Kudos to the University of Michigan Medical School for this decision.
We are The Leaders and Best!
It would totally turn the drug and medical device industry on its ear, (not to mention the practice of medicine overall) but the standards for "gifts" from the companies to doctors and institutions like hospitals really needs to change to encourage more competition. In most procurement activities for public and private enterprises, (i.e. government and industry) policy rules, (and often the law) prohibit a company or individual from providing anything of value to employees or institutions that has not been duly compensated at fair market value, i.e. no "freebies". No lunches, gifts, etc., either given or received.
That U-M Medical School, (and one presumes the Medical Center?) is taking a step in that direction is the correct one. I sincerely hope others follow.
That's your palm and it isn't Viagra that is the problem
Is one side effect that you forget how to spell "address"?
Where is the (newspaper name removed) to come and criticize us for not supporting Big Pharma and putting their Reps out of jobs!
Hail to the Victors!
A good blog post on this general topic a short time ago (lots of links):
Well, as an out of state student, I can't say I'm particurally pleased by this if it means I have to any more than the 45,000 dollars a year me and my family are already paying. I believe U of M has done something kinda similar before, when they went out and hired all of the best professors while all the other colleges were cutting back, saying it would be a diservice to future U of M students to cut back. Well, thats all well and dandy, but it is the current students footing the bill for all of this "U of M is greatest woooooo!!!!" stuff, and I'm just not sure thats fair, especially if the students don't get much of a say. I think some of the students would take the tuition not being raised another 5 grand a year all over all of this nose in the air, we're better than eveyone else stuff, I know I would.
You gotta pay to play; Michigan is one of the top public Universities in the nation.
I disagree. I don't know what state you're from, but unless you're from Virginia or California, in order to get an education comparable to UM you would have had to pay the big bucks at a private school instead. Top notch education is expensive, and worth it.
UM has always prided itself on being compared to the Ivy Leagues of the world, not the typical state schools. So we need to stay at the top, and there is a cost to do that. Your education was going to be expensive, a couple thousand dollar a year for a couple years won't be a big deal in the long run, and 20 years from now you'll be happy your alma mater is still a national leader.
It's not clear to me that this decision would have any impact on your tuition. If they use GF dollars to pay for that education, then I guess it could. That's a big "if" in itself.
If that were true, then I suspect that might impact what a med student pays next year, but isn't a big factor in what an UG pays.
I do understand where you are coming from though. Honestly. But I think if the U had to choose between "Being the best school we can be" and "keeing tuition low for people outside of MI" it's going to lean towards the former.
The money used to hire many of those professors, expand facilities, etc., are provided via the U-M Endowment, (via investments) government programs, state support, grants, etc., in addition to tuition. While tuition is certainly a large part of the University's operating budget, tuition and fees represent only 30% of the University's total operating budget, excluding the Medical Center, (when included, the percentage is reduced to 16%). Government-sponsored programs, a huge source of support for teaching and research, is 28% of the budget.
But, you can read it all here:
This is awesome. In most cases, an organization will take the stance that "everyone else is doing it, why shouldn't I?" Nice to see that we're doing it right regardless this time.
I've probably seen that video 75 times and it does not get old.
If it comes on during a commercial break I'll come back into the room to watch it. Again. Every time.
This is definitely a step in the right direction. That said, the pharmaceutical industry takes a lot of unwarranted flak in my opinion. Still, I'd rather have doctors prescribing medicine because the data says it works, not because some company is lining their pocket.
I'm a medical device salesman and our company has recently ended all of our freebies to clients as well. I feel good about it, but it's hard when your competitors haven't stopped.
However, many hospitals are putting measures in place to stop all "bribing" by med reps. I'm glad UM is leading the pack.
These are the real reasons why I'm proud to say GO BLUE.
As a current M.D./Ph.D. student (at PSUCOM) that cares a good bit about this: Way to go alma mater!
The Pharma-Free movement born out of medical schools (am I correct to say U-Pitt catalyzed this?) in the last decade is more successful than anyone could have imagined.
Has been leading the way on innovation in the medical profession (and the business of the medical profession) to reduce costs without reducing care. One of the projects with which I am somewhat familiar is a project to introduce cloud computing. Virtualization eliminated entire server farms on the medical campus, freeing up existing space that was re-used for clinical development. Projected savings were in the tens of millions of dollars. That ain't hay.
... and it really is depressing to see how decisions are made in the industry. You'd think a profession with such a altruistic goal would not be so corrupted by money... Damn that Adam Smith...
I'm no expert, and I'm sure someone else could explain it better, but I think you've got Adam Smith backwards. He never stated that people and organizations ought to behave according to pure self interest. Rather, he sought to describe situations in which individual acts of self interest aggregate into broader virtuous results. Amartya Sen would be super pissed.
I believe (this was true as of like 2007) that Michigan and Stanford are the only universities to be ranked in the top-10 for Medicine, Engineering, Law, and Business.