Dollars for Docs

A local FOX Atlanta show, you can see me and read about it here.

Reported By: Beth Galvin | Edited By: Leigha Baugham

Nearly 20 percent of American doctors get paid by drug companies to be consultants or speakers, and in some cases, they’re making quite a lot of money. So does that influence the decisions your doctor makes about your care?

Doctors earn money by giving professional talks to their peers about the latest research and the practice is pretty common.

For years it’s been unclear how much money physicians were actually earning for these speeches. Now, three major drug companies are going public revealing who is on their payrolls and how much money they’re making.

On Eli Lilly’s website, the company lists faculty on the drug company’s payrolls, including educators, advisors and contractors.

Nearly 200 Georgia doctors are on the list and they pulled in over $2.2 million dollars last year.

Some of Georgia’s highest paid physicians on the list are Emory urologist Dr. Muta Issa, who earned $ 91,000 from GlaxoSmithKline. Atlanta endocrinologist Dr. David Robertson cashed in over $78,000 from Eli Lilly and Roswell psychiatrist Dr. Michael Banov banked over $68,000 from Eli Lilly.

Some healthcare providers are earning much more by working for several companies at the same time.

“It’s common, that people who are very active, can make several hundred thousand dollars or more,” said Emory psychiatrist, Dr. Doug Bremner.

“We don’t sell medications. We simply educate physicians about data, and they make their own mind up,” said Dr. Banov.

Dr. Banov, a private practice psychiatrist, was paid over $68,000 by Eli Lilly. The Roswell doctor said he gives speeches for about five companies with competing medications.

“I think my patients welcome the fact they have a doctor who is meeting other doctors, actively involved in research, actively communicating with other physicians, someone who’s on top of the game,” Dr. Banov said.

Dr. Banov said the drug company, not him, creates the materials used in his speeches, and he also said there’s a reason for that. “We are only able to present the data. We’re not able to present our personal opinions, our personal preferences, how we use the medication off label, any of that. So we’re held to a very tight standard by the FDA.”

Emory’s Dr. Bremner said he thought paying doctors to speak for drug makers was a bad idea. Bremner said he used to do it, until he got a wakeup call about six years ago.

“I was going out to give a talk and the sales, the marketing guy like, slapped me on the back and said, ‘Go on out there and sell some,’ I’m not going to say the name of the drug. ‘Sell some of that drug,’” said Dr. Bremner.

Dr. Bremner said he worried that even the most independent doctor can get hooked on all that extra cash coming in. “Doctors are human, and once you get into this routine of making outside income, you become dependent on it.”

When asked how receiving money from the drug companies could from influencing how a doctor treats a patient, Dr. Banov said, “When I close that door, and I’m with a patient, my 100 percent interest is in getting that patient better.”

Last fall, Emory University’s School of Medicine banned staffers from making promotional talks for drug companies after congressional investigators accused the school’s chief of psychiatry, Dr. Charles Nemeroff of failing to report to the university over a million dollars he got from pharmaceutical and medical device manufacturers.

Dr. Nemeroff resigned his chairmanship, and has since left the school.

Another Emory staffer, urologist Dr. Issa listed his earnings as $91,000 in the first three months of 2009 from GlaxoSmithKline. Dr. Issa declined to comment on this story. A school spokesperson said Dr. Issa left the speaker’s bureau when Emory changed its policies.

Atlanta diabetes specialist Dr. David Robertson, who earned $78,000 for giving 47 promotional talks for Eli Lilly, said he only speaks about medications he actually prescribes.

“I think a presentation a physician makes should represent their own practice,” said Dr. Robertson. The doctor did admit that some physicians spend too much time promoting too many products. “That’s bad for everyone. That’s bad for the pharmaceutical companies, that’s bad for physicians as a profession and that’s bad probably for physicians as recipients of information because they become mistrustful.”

So are public lists like this a good thing?

Doctors on both sides say yes.

“I think it’s gotten to the point where the public is looking at it for what it is and they’re saying, ‘What’s going on here?’” said Dr. Bremner.

“Why not let the public know? There is nothing to hide. There is no shame. We’re not doing anything illegal,” said Dr. Banov. “I think it’s terrific. [It] should be completely open.”

So far, GlaxoSmithKline, Eli Lilly and Merck have published online lists of who’s on their payroll. Pfizer will be doing the same this spring.

Related Links: statements and public registries for Eli Lilly, Merck (also see here) and

GlaxoSmithKline (also see here).

Complete statement from Emory University School of Medicine regarding its new Conflict of Interest policy.

“In June of 2009, Emory’s School of Medicine adopted a comprehensive new policy governing faculty relationships with industry. The policy meets the recommendations of the Association of American Medical Colleges, the Association of American Universities, and the Institute of Medicine. Professors Issa, Pacifici, and Schulman are respected faculty members who are in compliance with that policy. Dr. Nemeroff resigned his position at Emory in fall of 2009 to become chair of psychiatry at another medical school.”