logo
    • Magazine
    • Membership
    • Donate
  • Racial Justice
  • Economic Justice
  • Climate Justice
  • Health Justice
  • Leadership
  • CONTENT TYPES
  • Subscribe
  • Webinars
    • Free Webinars
    • Premium On-Demand Webinars
  • Membership
  • Submissions

A Terrible Story of Nonprofits and their Pharma Support

Ruth McCambridge
November 3, 2017
Share
Tweet
Share
Email
Print
MaxPixel – FreeGreatPicture.com. Public domain. Creative Commons 0.

November 2, 2017; CNN Health

More than half of all Nuedexta pills sold since 2012 have been prescribed to residents of long-term care facilities, so why wouldn’t the company that produces them want to advertise with nonprofit organizations that support the families of Alzheimer’s sufferers? Perhaps a better question is why organizations meant to serve Alzheimer’s patients and their families would allow themselves to be used to market a drug that is inappropriate and dangerous to their members.

The recent decision of the Alzheimer’s Association to relinquish support from Nuedexta’s manufacturer, Avanir Pharmaceuticals, doesn’t much impress us. First, they did so only after a CNN investigation revealed Nuedexta is used largely in nursing homes despite the fact that its effects on the elderly have not been extensively studied and the drug is seen to increase patient vulnerability to falls.

Subsequently, the Los Angeles city attorney’s office— Avanir is based in Southern California—launched its own investigation into possible violations of state or federal laws. Nuedexta treats a rare disorder known as pseudobulbar affect, or PBA, and is not approved to treat dementia patients unless they also suffer from PBA, but regulators found that doctors diagnose PBA for nursing home residents to help the homes manage patients who are confused, agitated, or unruly.

Only after these two investigations did the Alzheimer’s Association declare it would not accept further funding from Avanir—after having received nearly $200,000 from the drug company this fiscal year.

“We are committed to people living with the disease,” the association declared in a statement, “and we encourage vigorous review and oversight of companies and prescribers to ensure best practices are followed for those impacted by Alzheimer’s disease.”

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the NPQ newsletter to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

By signing up, you agree to our privacy policy and terms of use, and to receive messages from NPQ and our partners.

Why does this ring to us as “too little, too late?”

Avanir has been an active sponsor of nonprofits studying Alzheimer’s and supporting those affected by Alzheimer’s. The Alzheimer’s Foundation of America, for instance, still receives money from the corporation, saying Avanir is only one of its many sponsors. The foundation went so far as to provide one of its medical advisory board members to make a statement. But the medical professional, Dr. Jeffrey Cummings, has himself received nearly $50,000 from Avanir in the form of consulting and royalty or licensing fees. Cummings also was “the lead researcher on Avanir’s study of Nuedexta in Alzheimer’s patients with agitation, which included 194 subjects and found that those on Nuedexta experienced falls at more than twice the rate as those on a placebo.”

Avanir has also made itself a fixture in academic and government settings where the disease is being addressed.

Much of the money being spent on Nuedexta is coming straight from the federal government, in the form of Medicare Part D prescription drug funding, for people 65 and over and the disabled. In 2015, the most recent year for which data is available, this Medicare program spent $138 million on Nuedexta—up more than 400 percent from just three years earlier.

A professor of ethics at Harvard Medical School, Eric Campbell, said such conflicts are common in nonprofits that support medical research. “There is not a single aspect of medical practice and medical education in the United States in which drug companies don’t have extensive financial relationships aimed exclusively at promoting their products. The marketing plan is money and payments which buys influence, attention and ultimately results in increased sales.”

The ethical violations and potential for human harm in this situation are legion but hardly uncommon in the world of patient advocacy organizations. One would imagine it’s not that difficult to review the track records and marketing practices of one’s sponsors before agreeing to display their names all over your materials. Perhaps the priorities for these groups are not as pure as advertised.—Ruth McCambridge

Share
Tweet
Share
Email
Print
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Ruth McCambridge

Ruth is Editor Emerita of the Nonprofit Quarterly. Her background includes forty-five years of experience in nonprofits, primarily in organizations that mix grassroots community work with policy change. Beginning in the mid-1980s, Ruth spent a decade at the Boston Foundation, developing and implementing capacity building programs and advocating for grantmaking attention to constituent involvement.

More about: Big Pharmadrug manufacturersManagement and LeadershipNonprofit NewsPhilanthropy

Become a member

Support independent journalism and knowledge creation for civil society. Become a member of Nonprofit Quarterly.

Members receive unlimited access to our archived and upcoming digital content. NPQ is the leading journal in the nonprofit sector written by social change experts. Gain access to our exclusive library of online courses led by thought leaders and educators providing contextualized information to help nonprofit practitioners make sense of changing conditions and improve infra-structure in their organizations.

Join Today
logo logo logo logo logo
See comments

You might also like
The Emergence of Black Funds
Cyndi Suarez
What We Lose When We Win: Exhaustion and the Fight Against Racist Repression
Camille Bennett
This Juneteenth, a Campaign to Fund Black Migrant Power
Kitana Ananda
Freeing Ourselves from Colonial, White Savior Models of Philanthropy
Nicolette Naylor and Nina Blackwell
What Is the Nonprofit Sector of a Future, Equitable World?
Devon Kearney
New Data Tells Us Where Donor-Advised Fund Dollars Go—And Don’t Go
Chuck Collins and Helen Flannery

NPQ_Summer_2022

Upcoming Webinars

July 14th, 2 pm ET

Combating Disinformation and Misinformation in 21st-Century Social Movements

Register Now
Group Created with Sketch.
July 28th, 2 pm ET

Changing the Subject

Boards As Social Movement Spaces

Register Now
You might also like
The Emergence of Black Funds
Cyndi Suarez
What We Lose When We Win: Exhaustion and the Fight Against...
Camille Bennett
This Juneteenth, a Campaign to Fund Black Migrant Power
Kitana Ananda

Like what you see?

Subscribe to the NPQ newsletter to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

See our newsletters

By signing up, you agree to our privacy policy and terms of use, and to receive messages from NPQ and our partners.

Independent & in your mailbox.

Subscribe today and get a full year of NPQ for just $59.

subscribe
  • About
  • Contact
  • Advertise
  • Copyright
  • Careers

We are using cookies to give you the best experience on our website.

 

Non Profit News | Nonprofit Quarterly
Powered by  GDPR Cookie Compliance
Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.

Strictly Necessary Cookies

Strictly Necessary Cookie should be enabled at all times so that we can save your preferences for cookie settings.

If you disable this cookie, we will not be able to save your preferences. This means that every time you visit this website you will need to enable or disable cookies again.