Merck & Company, Inc: The Recall of Vioxx Essay

Introduction Geroge W. Merck stated once stated, â€Å"We try never to forget that medicine is for the people. It is not for the profits. The profits follow. Initially, Vioxx was the blockbuster drug that Merck needed due to the upcoming Zocor patent cliff in 2006. With an estimated 27,785 heart attacks and sudden cardiac deaths that could have been avoided if Celebrex had been used instead of Vioxx, Merck faces the possibility of not only having to pay enormous civil and criminal penalties, but also losing the trust of patients. Many parties are partially culpable, but Merck faces the severe uphill battle of regaining a reputation that once served as a market differentiator; in the 1980’s, Merck was voted the â€Å"Most Admired Company in American Business† for seven consecutive years. A critical issue in this case is to analyze the events listed in the case and propose an alternate course of action that may help prevent future deaths from other pharmaceutical drugs while not prohibitively restricting innovative research that could potentially save lives if tested properly. Critical Points and Issues Merck was relying on the success of Vioxx due to Zocor’s expiring patent and the direct competition Vioxx was engaged in with Celebrex, which had a first mover advantage. While Celebrex was also a Cox-2 inhibitor, Vioxx was the only Cox-2 inhibitor proven to be beneficial for ulcers and gastrointestinal bleeding. Once studies came out suggesting that Vioxx contributed to a greater number of cardiovascular problems than naproxen, Merck seemed to opportunistically interpret these results. Furthermore, Merck did not institute any studies that might have found negative cardiovascular results, and management failed to perform a study that focused specifically on the cardiovascular risks of Vioxx. Instead, Merck spent a record amount on advertising the gastrointestinal benefit of the drug in a period of uncertainty. The advertising in the time of uncertainty is really unparalleled, and opens the door to questioning (Appendix). Stakeholder Impacts Merck Merck wanted to discover a drug in the Cox-2 inhibitor class that would compete with another class of drugs known as nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDS). Cox-2 inhibitors were developed to eliminate the most common side effects of other NSAIDs, ulcers and gastrointestinal bleeding, as an estimated 15,000 people die from GI bleeding annually; Vioxx was designed to treat those high-risk candidates. Vioxx was the only Cox-2 inhibitor proven to have a benefit for ulcers and GI bleeding. Thus, the blockbuster status was created: a stronger drug with a proven benefit for ulcers and gastrointestinal bleeding. As the events unfold in the case, the crucial errors occur prior to the decision to recall the drug on September 30, 2004. After Merck learned that patients had double the risk of heart attack or stroke than if they took placebo and two new competing Cox-2 inhibitors were introduced, Merck decided to pull the drug, but it was already far too late. Dr. Eric Topol, a highly regarded cardiologist conducting research at the Cleveland Clinic, was the first researcher to raise questions about Vioxx. While he concluded that Vioxx produces a risk of heart attack five times greater than naproxen sodium, some believed that Merck’s scientists interpreted the data opportunistically; by saying the difference was due to the protective effect of naproxen, this downplayed the important possibility that Vioxx was contributing to cardiovascular problems. Some scientists say that the protective effect of naproxen argument is implausible, and noted that naproxen would have to be three times as effective as aspirin to account for the difference. While the FDA didn’t buy this argument and issued a warning on all Vioxx labels, many began to wonder if this was the first sign of an unethical deception, cover-up, and manipulation by Merck. Additionally, as the label was added, Merck would later ironically cite the VIGOR study in defense o f Vioxx: it increased the risk only in those patients believe to be a high risk. However, Dr. Gregory D. Curfman, editor of the prominent New England Journal of Medicine noted that it had â€Å"solid evidence that important data on cardiac events was deleted or withheld.† Dr. Curfman argued that the three deleted heart attacks occurred in people who were otherwise at low risk for heart problems, which would ultimately discredit Merck’s claim that is only increased the risk for high-risk patients. The FDA’s mild warning hardly curbed the widespread use of the drug, yet Merck continued to advertise its big benefit to consumers more than any other company in 2000 (Appendx): it causes fewer cases of stomach bleeding. However, this is only a problem for a very small percentage of patients. Thus, there was evidence that hundreds of thousands of people were using the drug that didn’t really benefit from its one advantage. Merck seemed to engage in deceptive marketing practices highlighting this benefit and not the immense risks to compensate for its declining financial situation, nor the fact that the drug was designed specifically for consumers that were in the high-risk gastrointestinal category. In March 2000, management first learned the results from a study of 8,100 rheumatoid arthritis patients that began to take the medication in January. The results from the Vigor study should have alerted management to the potential dangers and risks of using Vioxx. However, since the FDA repeatedly approved the drug, this psychologically this seemed to create the illusion that the drug was safe. While evidence was mounting against the potential risks, in 2000 alone, Merck spent $160 million in direct-to-consumer advertising, the highest that year for all drugs. FDA The FDA has commonly been criticized for requiring superfluous testing. However, others argue that drugs are rushed through testing due to enormous pressure from the drug companies. Even after a drug has been approved, many of the risks are still unknown. The mild warning given by the FDA seemed entirely inappropriate, an action that ultimately prolonged the use of Vioxx for consumers that were not high-risk candidates. In Merck’s defense, it was promoting a product that did in fact reduce pain and gastrointestinal problems; however, it omitted the crucial detail that it increased the risk of cardiovascular problems. The FDA responded by giving Merck a warning, but ultimately, the FDA failed in its ultimate duty to protect the American consumer. Doctors The doctors prescribing the medications failed to sufficiently research the medication and seemed to rely too heavily on the influence of Merck salespeople and/or the general public. If physicians were cognizant that only a small percentage of the population would actually benefit from the fewer gastrointestinal problems, but would expose themselves to a potentially higher risk of developing heart problems, the doctors should have at least informed the patients that NSAIDS might be a safer alternative. The risk-benefit for many patients simply was not justified. The mild warning given by the FDA did not prompt most doctors to research the warning, as essentially all drugs have notable risks. Doctors and patients are also usually affected by the psychological affect of new drugs-these drugs are perceived to be better than existing drugs on the market. Knowing this psychological affect on consumers, the doctors may have felt pressured to prescribe the drug if consumers were asking for it after seeing the advertisements. However, Vioxx was first approved for people with a high risk of GI problems. It is estimated that only about 10% of the prescriptions for Vioxx were most likely for patients that had a high risk of GI problems; the drug was widely overprescribed and was not the optimal treatment for many patients. Patients and Advertising As Merck spent over $500 million advertising Vioxx, many critics try to blame Merck for promoting a product that many believed had a risk that severely outweighed the benefit, especially for patients without a prior history of gastrointestinal problems. An underlying problem in the case is that medicines in America are overused. Many health problems can be avoided by a lifestyle change. Patients need to know that all medications are potentially dangerous and should be used sparingly. However, in the Vioxx case, many consumers were ultimately oblivious about the risk-benefit tradeoff, as it was not mentioned in the advertisements or consultations with physicians. Options and Solution Implementation Considering that Merck adheres to the philosophy of its founder, George Merck, â€Å"medicine is for the people. It is not for the profits,† the course of action taken by modern-day Merck executives followed a path seemingly motivated by financial pressures. The executives seemed to believe that the success of the company was heavily reliant upon Vioxx, and wanted to mitigate any negative associations the drug had with cardiovascular problems. When evidence began to come in showing a potential link between Vioxx and cardiovascular problems, Merck did not run any studies that attempting to reveal the cause of the negative cardiovascular results. Management should have listened to Dr. Deepak Bhatt, a cardiologist at the Cleveland Clinic, who proposed a study of Vioxx in patients with severe chest pain to Merck management. Dr. Bhatt commented at the time â€Å"they {Merck} should have done a trial like this. If they {Merck} internally thought this drug was safe in patients with heart disease, there was no reason not to do it.† Management never ordered a test that would directly explain the results of the clinical trial in 2000. The FDA sent Merck a warning letter for minimizing the serious cardiovascular findings. However, a better option would have been for the FDA to put a black-box warning on Vioxx’s label, or stop the direct-to-consumer advertising until the issue was sorted out. Considering Merck operates under the aforementioned motto, Vioxx was not the optimal treatment for the majority of the patients that took the medication. The patients were not aware of this, and Merck’s aggressive marketing campaign reinforced the belief that this was the proper medication for all patients. Many patients were unnecessarily exposed to a risk due to aggressive marketing tactics when other NSIDS would have been the optimal medication for many patients, not to mention at a lower cost. The government should pay for tests that compare new drugs to older drugs. Many older drugs are simply ignored in favor of newer, heavily advertised drugs. Ultimately, it may take several years following approval for side effects to be exposed-a phenomena that could be avoided altogether if this analysis is done. In addition, the patent life of drugs should be extended. Obviously after this tragedy, drug makers should be required to conduct more studies, but the patent life should be extended to mitigate the pressure to rush drugs to market. Another year of testing means another lost year in terms of patent coverage, and many companies feel pressured to rush drugs to market due to the declining exclusivity period. Bringing a drug to market takes roughly 14 years at a cost of $1.3 billion. If companies are forced to go through additional testing, patent lives should be extended to ensure the incentive for future innovation. Additionally, this could help alleviate the pressure placed upon the FDA to rush drugs to market if companies have longer exclusivity periods, allowing the FDA to conduct additional testing that could potentially prevent future problems. Communication Analysis Vioxx was a medication that was designed to alleviate the gastrointestinal problems for high-risk patients. Vioxx was effective for these high-risk patients that did not have weak hearts. The drug should have never been prescribed to 90% of the patients that received the medication. In the end, some people who shouldn’t have been taking the medication died, and the people who could actually benefit from the medication couldn’t use it because it was pulled from the market. Once preliminary evidence began to mount that there was evidence of this potential link, the aggressive advertising should have stopped immediately. Management should have communicated more clearly to the physicians that this medication was primarily for high-risk patients and articulated the cost/benefit more clearly. In addition, ignoring negative evidence seemed to prove management’s confirmation bias. Management’s deceptive promotion of the drug to increase sales has marred the reputation of a company that may never sufficiently recover. The rigidity of management, unethical, and criminal behavior has tarnished a once respected name.

Kenneth's Waltz Systems of Theory of Int'l Politics Critique and Essay

Kenneth's Waltz Systems of Theory of Int'l Politics Critique and Evaluation - Essay Example Post the Second World War, Neo-Liberalism became a significant feature of International Relations. The concept gained impetus, with the establishment of the European Coal and Steel Community, now known as the European Union. Then came about the Neo-Realistic Approach, put forth by Kenneth Waltz. This approach has been hailed as a more scientific approach. Waltz' 'Theory of International Politics' (1979) laid the basis of the behavioural theory. He does not concern himself exclusively with the ethics of state craft or moral dimensions of foreign policy. In his first work, 'Man, the State and War-A Theoretical Analysis' (1959), he agreed with the classical realist argument that power-seeking state is also a creation of man. However, twenty years later, Waltz acknowledged the bi-polarity and dominance of super-powers in this world. He traces the anarchical state system and highlights the neorealist tenets. Waltz, in his theory, talks about the absence of a world government and states that International Relations is an anarchical system. He also talks about Sovereignty of states and that the International System comprises similar units.

Nukes; Who Has the Power Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Nukes; Who Has the Power - Essay Example State Department 1). In addition, the agency also ensures that there is peaceful exchange of equipment and use of nuclear energy (U.S. State Department 1). The Nuclear Weapons Council (NWC) plays a major role in maintaining the U.S. nuclear weapons stockpile. The department ensures that U.S. nuclear weapons are safe, secure, reliable, and effective. The NWC department facilitates cooperation and establishes priorities that govern the management of U.S. nuclear weapons stockpile through the Department of Defense and the Department of Energy (Natural Resources Defense Council 1). Indeed, the Department of Defense (DOD) administers the countrys military units prepared to work nuclear weapons and their delivery vehicles (Natural Resources Defense Council 1). The department oversees the uniformed military and agencies handling nuclear weapons issues. It also drafts arrangements for utilizing nuclear weapons and oversees the transaction of nuclear arms control understandings. On the other hand, the Department of Energy researches, produces, and dismantles nuclear warheads and materials (Natural Resources Defense Council 1). The National Nuclear Security Administration oversees the nation’s nuclear weapons design facilities and safeguards the safety, reliability, durability, and security of U.S nuclear weapons and naval nuclear reactors (U.S Department of Energy 1). The National Nuclear Security Administration responds to nuclear emergency in America and addresses global nuclear nonproliferation issues. The agency seeks to reduce global danger from weapons of mass destruction and offers safe and effective nuclear propulsion to the American Navy (U.S Department of Energy 1). The National Security Council is an executive branch in the Office of the President that coordinates efforts among government offices trying to control the spread of nuclear weapons and to address nuclear deterrence and security

Advertising and public relations Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2250 words

Advertising and public relations - Essay Example In relation to the present global business environment, it can frequently be observed that marketing activities along with Public Relations (PR) are concurrently deemed as a major focused area. In relation to the various observations from different scholars, it can be said that PR is one of the major, effective as well as versatile tools of marketing communication which enables to enhance the efficiency of each marketing activity. It can be executed both in the internal as well as in the external environment of the organisation. According to the present day context, advertising can be regarded as one of the major marketing activities, which frequently involves various functions of PR. It is increasingly observed that the organisations in the present business environment have become quite prone to face different PR related issues in terms of executing campaigns for their products within the global markets (Zerfass & Duhring, 2012). Emphasising upon the major influence or impact of PR in the advertising and other product campaign activities, the main objective of this report is to discuss an issue which was raised by Greenpeace with the aid of a PR campaign against Nestle. The product which had been focused upon in the PR campaign was Kit Kat, a leading product offering of Nestle. The assault on the established brand of Kit Kat occurred in the year 2010 (Greenpeace, n.d.). Consequently, based on the assessment of the situation faced by Nestle (especially Kit Kat brand) due to the PR campaign, the discussion of this report will be focused on developing an effective PR strategy which can enable Kit Kat to efficiently address different PR concerning issues. Moreover, the discussion in this report will further focus on developing methods of evaluating the PR plan for Kit Kat in the respective area or market. Situational Analysis In relation to the PR issue that was faced by Kit Kat, a globally well-known product of Nestle, it has been observed that Greenpeace, an org anisation which acted as a pressure group, depicted the rather dismal state of affairs which was surrounding behind the gleam and shine of a widely preferred product such as Kit Kat (Shreeves, 2010). Through the dynamic PR campaign, Greenpeace wanted to depict that Kit Kat, a renowned product of Nestle family includes a higher usage of palm oil which is generally derived from Indonesian rain forests, resulting in significant deforestation. The extensive use of palm oil by the company has been significantly threatening the livelihood of the local people in places such as Indonesia as well as it is also drastically endangering inhabitants such as orang-utan towards destruction (Guardian News and Media Limited, 2013). In this regard, the extensive use of palm oil or continuous deforestation initiatives of Nestle has been criticised by Greenpeace. Therefore, in order to take immediate measures towards the deforestation initiatives, Nestle has developed its business plan which ensures to take away the suppliers or companies from its supply chain that are likely to practice deforestation (Greenpeace, n.d.). Greenpeace can be considered as one of the major non-profit organisations, which tends to protect natural environment from a range of organisational activities. Greenpeace is considerably focusing on alleviating numerous issues with regard to different environmental concerns that include global

Human Resources Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words - 2

Human Resources - Essay Example exhibited signs of aggressive behavior in terms of constantly yelling at his subordinates, picking on some identified individuals (perceived as impinging in his position) on the basis of race, gender or sexual orientation, blocking his subordinate’s promotions, attacking workers through name-calling or delivering personal offensive criticisms in the form of jokes, deliberately embarrassing his subordinates in front of higher management or other stakeholders, among others. No subordinate even had the courage nor the veracity to report his behavior to higher management since a previous incident of reporting the discrimination issues caused the subordinate’s job. The acts actually violate the law on Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO), specifically Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which states that â€Å"this law makes it illegal to discriminate against someone on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, or sex. The law also makes it illegal to retaliate against a person because the person complained about discrimination, filed a charge of discrimination, or participated in an employment discrimination investigation or lawsuit. The law also requires that employers reasonably accommodate applicants and employees sincerely held religious practices, unless doing so would impose an undue hardship on the operation of the employers business† (U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, n.d., par. 1) The Human Resources Department (HRD)could have handled the situation by making random actual monitoring and review of the performance of their managerial personnel through various means: through direct (but unannounced and discrete) observation, distributing performance observation forms to be completed by subordinates (for all managerial positions), encouraging reporting through an open communication line where the sender’s identity could be anonymous, and providing regular orientation for all employees on pertinent labor laws and ways to file

Critical Thinking Part 4 Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Critical Thinking Part 4 - Assignment Example The authors clearly and openly recognize the subjects of the research, but have failed to indicate whether their Human Rights were protected. However, I feel that the subjects’ Human Rights were protected to prevent them against any exploitation or discrimination. Yes, the authors have acknowledged that they were given the permission to carry out this study which was approved by local university and hospital moral review committees. Also, the authors obtained informed consent from all the participants (Wilkins & Woodgate 458). In interpretive account, participants’ conscription focused on persons having the knowledge under study. In view of that, the insertion standards were as follows: cancer survivors who were out primary cancer diagnosis for 5 or more years, 19 years of age at the time of interview, taking residency in the region where the interviews were to be conducted, and fluent speakers of English. Research participants were conscripted from hospital based catalog and regional cancer registry. The regional cancer registry was consulted to exclude persons with malignant tumor diagnosis, second cancer diagnosis, amid others. Although the authors tell us that the participants were recruited, they have not indicated that the subjects received any money. There was no unseemly conflict of interest during recruitment. Most of the participants were from the vulnerable cancer survivors. Ideally, after one is diagnosed with cancer, the danger of developing a second cancer is an ingredient of day after day life. All the research subjects accounted that they had the full knowledge of their second cancer. Second cancer was expressed in terms of probable danger features for cancer, providing detailed information to the cancer survivors with a view to preparing them to conceptualize the theoretical nature of danger. This information forms the bulk of the argument that the subjects came from the vulnerable population (Wilks &

McDonald's Strategic Choices Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

McDonald's Strategic Choices - Essay Example This will make their comparisons and differences, clearly distinguished. McDonalds's is specialized in; beef, chicken, bread, potatoes, and milk. These are the main products in their ingredients. The firm has rapidly grown and a study on their strategies and policies places it in even a better position of further development. In fact the number of restraunts has drastically increased since its establishment. As a result, the company has built a strong goodwill and public image. Wal-Mart on the other hand has its effect felt globally. The firm has also followed suite by setting up numerous shops in different parts the world and partnering with other major companies. While McDonald's expansion is doing wonderful, Wal-Mart has had its share of disappointments in trying to sell overseas, their business in Britain and Germany was tragic and led to loses. But this in turn, has not changed the position that Wal-Mart is still the World's biggest employer. Wal-Mart expansion is also seen in local hubs unlike other corporates who target mainly the major towns and cities. (Fadtastic It should also be noted that both companies have had their hard times due to small mistakes in their different restaurants, shops and branches spread all over America, Europe and Asia. Claims launched against them being low pays, exploitation, services among others. They in turn practiced the right measures to clear the messes settling the rows. To cite examples that almost ruin their business, there was a time when the Hindu community allegedly claimed that McDonald's French fries had beef flavoring and as a result called on its community to sabotage their products. If it were not for their hardworking strategy team's speed they would have lost it. The team in turn sincerely apologized and later on paid to settle Hindus, anything to win their trust and loyalty back. Wal-Mart though has not yet managed to professionally convince its consumers completely. In fact, communities recently demonstrated over their going, 'greed policy' terming it as green/brain washing over their employee' s package offer that is, low pays and limited health care benefits. Critics say that they are rational in their business activities, workers. It demands that we look at the organization's structures as the first strategy. McDonald's management runs the business under departments with each one handling a different responsibility from the other. The Operations dealing with the equipments, Development taking care of property and structural aspects, Finance in supplies and monetary control, Marketing carrying out sales, promotions while Human Resources caters for customer care, personnel, hygiene and safety. This arrangement has enabled services and products to follow chain easily and as a result, improved on efficiency and customer confidence with are key to boosting loyalty, hence maximizing on their profits.If the consequent choice of strategy is followed, McDonald's can take their desired direction. The firm's vision for growth is in shape though competitors are always trying best to topple them. Basic secrets and traditions that still place them at the top continue to be followed with improvements coming in handy too. He alth is given the number one priority with extreme measures put to ensure that workers and the business premise are