Direct-to-Consumer Prescription Programs Seem Ripe for Misuse
By Crystal Lindell
Two large pharmaceutical companies have launched websites that help consumers get prescriptions to the medications that they make – and I’m honestly surprised that the entire setup is even legal.
Pfizer launched PfizerForAll in August, while Eli Lilly started LillyDirect back in January. Both websites connect patients with supposedly independent doctors, who can then write prescriptions – for Pfizer or Lilly medications, of course. Both companies will then help facilitate getting the prescription filled, even offering to connect patients with direct-to-home delivery.
While direct-to-consumer prescriptions may seem like a win for patients – considering how overly complicated and expensive the U.S. healthcare system is – it also seems ripe for misuse. And when it comes to healthcare, that can have serious consequences, up to and including death.
Pfizer says its new website serves patients seeking treatment for migraines, COVID-19 or influenza, as well as adults seeking vaccines for preventable diseases, including COVID, flu, RSV and pneumococcal pneumonia.
To be more specific, PfizerForAll facilitates patient access to Pfizer medications for migraine, COVID-19 or flu, as well as Pfizer vaccines. Maybe they should just call it AllForPfizer.
Meanwhile, Eli LIlly’s site is for patients seeking treatment for obesity, migraine and diabetes. Like Pfizer’s program, LillyDirect provides access only to “select Lilly medicines.” Maybe they should change the name to DirectToLilly.
Both companies say their direct-to-consumer programs are designed to make things easier for patients who lack the time, knowledge and resources to manage their own health.
“People often experience information overload and encounter roadblocks when making decisions for themselves or their family in our complex and often overwhelming U.S. healthcare system. This can be extremely time-consuming and lead to indecision or inaction – and as a result, poor health outcomes,” Aamir Malik, Executive Vice President and Chief U.S. Commercial Officer for Pfizer, said in a press release.
"A complex U.S. healthcare system adds to the burdens patients face when managing a chronic disease. With LillyDirect, our goal is to relieve some of those burdens by simplifying the patient experience to help improve outcomes," David Ricks, Lilly's chair and CEO, said when LillyDirect was launched
To make it easier for patients to buy Pfizer and Lilly products, both companies offer similar amenities.
PfizerForAll boasts access to same-day doctor appointments; home delivery of prescriptions, over-the-counter drugs and tests; appointment scheduling for vaccines; and even help paying for Pfizer medicines.
The LillyDirect site is similar. It offers "independent healthcare providers” and home delivery of Lilly medicines through “third-party pharmacy dispensing services." Lilly says its vendors make treatment decisions based on their own “independent medical judgment.”
So, yes, patients will get appointments with supposedly independent doctors. But something tells me the doctors getting booked with patients via Lilly’s website aren’t going to be writing any prescriptions for Pfizer medications. Or vice versa.
I’m also very skeptical of the claim that doctors aren’t getting any money from the companies directly. Even if they are only getting referrals, that’s more than enough to heavily incentivize doctors to only prescribe medications that those companies make. Especially if the doctors are told that the patient they are seeing was referred to them by the pharmaceutical company itself.
Personally, when I see a doctor, I want them to write prescriptions based on what’s in my best interest – not what’s in the best interest of a pharmaceutical company. Perhaps it's naive and idealistic of me to still believe that doctors are writing prescriptions based solely on a patient’s need for that specific medicine.
Perhaps healthcare in the United States is already so far beyond that thought process that these new websites aren’t too much of a leap. After all, pharmaceutical companies have long been working hard to influence doctors. So, maybe this is just the next logical step.
Whenever I go to a makeup store like Ulta, I’m well aware that the seemingly helpful sales clerks are all trying to push me toward a specific lipstick brand. They may even get commissions from the lipstick company for making a sale.
But, the thing is, what brand of lipstick I wear isn’t a life or death decision. I expect more from companies that make medications. Even if they don’t hold themselves to a higher standard, I expect more from the government regulators who allow this sort of thing.
Yes, healthcare in the United States is horrific. I know that firsthand. I’m just not convinced that pharmaceutical companies have much interest in helping to fix that.