Case Summary
An anonymous, non-contactable complainant alleged that Pfizer had sponsored a meeting one Saturday morning in March 2010 at a luxury golf and spa resort hotel.
The complainant considered that the location, timing and venue were the factors which persuaded doctors to attend. Pharmaceutical companies should not use such tactics to entice doctors to their meetings. The event lasted only until lunchtime, after which the attendees could use the venue's extensive spa and golf facilities, or go visit local attractions.
The detailed response from Pfizer is given below.
The Panel noted Pfizer's submission that it had had no involvement in the meeting. No evidence had been provided by the complainant to support their allegation. The Panel considered that on the information before it, Pfizer had had no involvement with the meeting and thus no breach of Code was ruled.
CASE AUTH/2307/3/10 ANONYMOUS v PFIZER
NO BREACH OF THE CODE
Alleged Sponsorship of a meeting
An anonymous, non-contactable complainant alleged that Pfizer had sponsored a meeting one Saturday morning in March 2010 at a luxury golf and spa resort hotel.
The complainant considered that the location, timing and venue were the factors which persuaded doctors to attend. Pharmaceutical companies should not use such tactics to entice doctors to their meetings. The event lasted only until lunchtime, after which the attendees could use the venue’s extensive spa and golf facilities, or go visit local attractions.
The detailed response from Pfizer is given below.
The Panel noted Pfizer's submission that it had had no involvement in the meeting. No evidence had been provided by the complainant to support their allegation. The Panel considered that on the information before it, Pfizer had had no involvement with the meeting and thus no breach of Code was ruled.
An anonymous, non-contactable complainant complained about arrangements for a meeting which the complainant alleged was sponsored by Pfizer Limited.
COMPLAINT
The complainant noted that the meeting at issue had been held on Saturday, 20 March 2010 at a luxury golf and spa resort hotel.
The complainant considered that the location, timing and venue were the factors which persuaded doctors to attend. Pharmaceutical companies should not use such tactics to entice doctors to their meetings. The event lasted only until lunchtime, after which the attendees could use the venue’s extensive spa and golf facilities, or visit local attractions.
The complainant considered that if the meeting arrangements were generally known, the public would be appalled.
When writing to Pfizer the Authority asked it to respond in relation to the requirements of Clauses 2, 9.1 and 19.1 of the Code.
RESPONSE
Pfizer submitted that the meeting in question was arranged and organised solely by a third party. Pfizer had no involvement; it neither provided sponsorship and nor did it have a promotional stand at the meeting. No Pfizer personnel attended the meeting. Pfizer provided a letter from the organisers confirming that a meeting had been held that day but that Pfizer was not involved in any way with the meeting.
PANEL RULING
The Panel noted Pfizer's submission that it had had no involvement in the meeting. No evidence had been provided by the complainant to support their allegation. The Panel considered that on the information before it, Pfizer had had no involvement with the meeting and thus it could not be in breach of the Code as alleged. The Panel ruled no breach of Clauses 2, 9.1 and 19.1.
Complaint received 31 March 2010
Case completed 28 April 2010
