This site is intended for health professionals only
Thursday 23 February 2012
Facebook Twiter Linkedin

Concern as doctors' community is sold to American marketing company

By Laura Passi | 26 Aug 2011

GPs have raised ethical concerns after the online community Doctors.net.uk was bought for a reported £13 million by the US marketing company M3 USA.

Doctors.net.uk was created  ‘for doctors, by doctors' in 1998 and now has 184,000 members, but was bought by M3 USA this week.

The US-based marketing company is largely unknown, but according to its website: 'provides the life science industry with highly targeted interactive marketing, education, content, and research solutions'.

Aki Tomaru, CEO of M3 USA said: 'The addition of Doctors.net.uk is a powerful expansion of our commitment to providing the pharmaceutical industry full global access'.

‘The demand for pharmaceutical digital marketing services in the UK market is expected to grow rapidly in the coming years and this acquisition will place M3 at the leading position to benefit from the growth. This acquisition will also be a nice stepping stone for M3 to expand into the countries in the European Union'.

But the announcement has caused concern among GPs. Dr Una Coales, a GP in Stockwell, South London, said Doctors.net.uk users were annoyed that they didn't give their consent before the forum was sold.

She said: 'The sale means only one thing; the obvious. Big Pharma want access to 180,000 UK doctors to perhaps influence prescribing.'

'£13 million up front implies M3 USA are expecting to make a huge return on their expensive acquisition. Doctors who access Doctors.net.uk should be made aware of this potential conflict of interest to their ethical duty.'

But Richard Adams, the CEO of Doctors.net.uk said the sale gave Doctors.net.uk 'tremendous resources' to further develop.

'We will be integrating some of the M3 solutions that are successful in the US and Japan. We also believe that we will be able to contribute to the development of rest of the M3 Group, as some of the solutions we've built in the UK can be transferable to them,' he said.

READERS' COMMENTS

Trefor Roscoe, GP Partner,
25 Aug 2011
Why on earth would the members be consulted, they have not paid in a penny. The site was built up as an investment by people who put up £1m and guaranteed borrowing of another £10m.

The site already allows pharmaceutical companies to contact doctors, thats how it runs. There is no conflict of interest, or is Dr Coales suggesting no one should read Pulse as it is entirely financed by the adverts of the pharmaceutical industry?

DoI - I worked for the company between 1999 and 2001.
Average (0Votes)
Top
Scott Cummings, Practice Manager,
25 Aug 2011
I had trouble reading this article due to the 4 ads from Big Pharma. What kind of cheeky company can write criticize Pharma and raise ethical concens whilst taking money from the same? Everyone is trying to market to us. The advertisements on this site are not even marked as advertisements. Stone throwing in glass houses! For profit company UBM writing articles about Pharma influence while showing Pharma advertisements is shameful. #ubm_fail
Average (0Votes)
Top
Anonymous, Sessional/Locum GP,
26 Aug 2011
Why should the members Not be contacted, when the website always attracted doctors with the "for doctors by doctors" slogan trying to imply impartiality despite the "necessary hassle" of reading the pharmaceutical bulletins "which helped keep it a free site" ?? So what if the doctors have not paid a penny?? I am grateful to the founders for the services provided for doctors like me over the years - occasional website use, prompt reading of drug bulletins "to keep it all free" and especially for the elearning modules, but do I REALLY want a marketing company that has bought
the website and has the full history of my personal details, job situation and
browsing history - have this kind of access to not just my data, but a whole community of doctors? "highly targeted interactive marketing" indeed...I worry about the fact that you don't seem to find anything wrong with this...
Average (0Votes)
Top
Anonymous, GP Partner,
26 Aug 2011
Is this a resignation issue?
Average (0Votes)
Top
Anonymous, Other healthcare professional,
29 Aug 2011
Doctors have too much pressure from 'Big Pharma' - I know that the companies support medical education (about their own products) but isn't it time that an English company remained English? Too many (probably most) have been bought by foreigners and financiers who just want the profits without believing in the product.
Average (0Votes)
Top
Anonymous, GP registrar,
30 Aug 2011
Predictable. Just a very cheeky. Doctors.net was pushed forward with the backing of Medical schools, Royal collages and NHS trusts forcing you to sign up to be able to apply for jobs. Not looking for conspiracy theories but it did get a suspiciously high level of pressured backing during the startup phase.

How far does ‘for doctors, by doctors' go profit share?
Average (0Votes)
Top
Anonymous, PCT,
30 Aug 2011
So one private company, the owners of Doctors.net, have sold a business to another private company. I dont understand what the issue or concern is, its not as if anyone is forced to use it.
Average (0Votes)
Top

ADD YOUR COMMENTS

Please note You must be a registered user of PulseToday and logged in to add comments. Opinions expressed below are those of the writers and do not necessarily reflect those of PulseToday. Comments are considered in the public domain and may be used in future Pulse coverage. We accept no responsibility, legal or otherwise, for the accuracy or the content of member comments.

Comment*

You must be logged in to add a comment.Clickhere to login.

SIGN UP FOR EMAIL NEWSLETTERS

Keep up-to-date with the latest changes to the NHS, CPD and clinical guidelines. Sign up below or find out more.

POLL

Should GPs begin switching patients to atorvastatin immediately? Read the full story here

LATEST FORUM POSTS