Glaxo Decision to End Promotional Payments to Physicians Precedes Obamacare Rollout

Pharmaceutical giant GlaxoSmithKlines announcement on December 16 that it will cease paying doctors to promote its products took the medical community by surprise, but the plan appears to have been in the works for some time.

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American


Pharmaceutical giant GlaxoSmithKline’s announcement on December 16 that it will cease paying doctors to promote its products took the medical community by surprise, but the plan appears to have been in the works for some time.

Employing doctors to promote brand-name drugs at conferences has been an industry standard for decades, and many researchers and consumer advocates claim that the practice creates an unethical conflict of interest. The Physician Payment Sunshine Act, a provision of the 2010 Affordable Care Act, requires drug manufacturers to report these payments to the federal government. In an effort to increase transparency the data will be published online starting next year.

Glaxo, which makes the popular drugs Paxil and Advair, began reporting its payments for promotional speaking in 2009. According to ProPublica’s Dollars for Docs database, the company has dramatically scaled back its payments to physicians over the last five years—from $15.4 million per quarter in 2009 to $2.5 million per quarter in 2012.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Other drug companies have continued the practice unabated, but Susan Chimonas, a research scholar at the Center on Medicine as a Profession at Columbia University, thinks Glaxo’s announcement signals that the Sunshine Act is having its intended effect. “Many people have wondered, what difference will it make?” she asked in a ProPublica story. “Will it clean up practices, or just allow the status quo to continue so long as there is transparency? Glaxo's move is giving us an early answer—and reason for optimism. The saying about sunlight being the best disinfectant—that's exactly what we're seeing here. The Sunshine law is working.”

Speaking with the New York Times, Glaxo CEO Andrew Witty said the company’s decision was part of a general effort “to try and make sure we stay in step with how the world is changing.”

“We keep asking ourselves, are there different ways, more effective ways of operating than perhaps the ways we as an industry have been operating over the last 30, 40 years?” Witty told the Times. The company plans to phase out physician payments completely by 2016.

Glaxo also announced that it would stop compensating its global sales representatives based on the number of prescriptions they bring in, a practice banned in the U.S. but common elsewhere.

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe