The Secret Lives of Big Pharma's 'Thought Leaders'

[BridgeTheGap]

In the early 1970s, a group of medical researchers decided to study an unusual question. How would a medical audience respond to a lecture that was completely devoid of content, yet delivered with authority by a convincing phony? To find out, the authors hired a distinguished-looking actor and gave him the name Dr. Myron L. Fox. They fabricated an impressive CV for Dr. Fox and billed him as an expert in mathematics and human behavior. Finally, they provided him with a fake lecture composed largely of impressive-sounding gibberish, and had him deliver the lecture wearing a white coat to three medical audiences under the title "Mathematical Game Theory as Applied to Physician Education." At the end of the lecture, the audience members filled out a questionnaire.

The responses were overwhelmingly positive. The audience members described Dr. Fox as "extremely articulate" and "captivating." One said he delivered "a very dramatic presentation." After one lecture, 90 percent of the audience members said they had found the lecture by Dr. Fox "stimulating." Over all, almost every member of every audience loved Dr. Fox's lecture, despite the fact that, as the authors write, it was delivered by an actor "programmed to teach charismatically and nonsubstantively on a topic about which he knew nothing."

It is tempting to imagine that the Dr. Fox study reveals a deep flaw in the structure of medicine—for example, that health-care workers are too trusting of authority, or that Continuing Medical Education (CME) lectures are a sham. But what the study actually reveals may be something closer to the opposite. If medicine were simple and transparent, pretending to be a medical expert would be very difficult. An audience could spot incompetence right away. Pretending to be a medical expert is possible precisely because medical knowledge is so specialized and opaque. These days an ordinary doctor can no more expect to understand the intricacies of specialized medical research than the driveway mechanic who tinkered with his Volkswagen in 1962 can expect to fully understand the complex, computerized automobiles on the road today. Those who have tried to sit through a medical lecture in a field other than their own will secretly admit that they could have been fooled by Dr. Fox as well.

Since the 1950s, marketers have been taken with the idea that when it comes to spreading the word about unfamiliar products or ideas, some people are far more important than others. The phrase "opinion leader" was made familiar by the sociologists Paul Lazarsfeld and Elihu Katz in their 1955 book, Personal Influence, where they used the term to explain the way that media messages were filtered and spread by personal, face-to-face contact with influential people. It is not hard to see why marketers liked this idea. Mass-media advertising can be expensive. What if there were a way to avoid the masses and simply concentrate on the special people? Today the pharmaceutical industry uses the terms "thought leader" or "key opinion leader"—KOL for short—to refer to influential physicians, often academic researchers, who are especially effective at transmitting messages to their peers. Pharmaceutical companies hire KOL's to consult for them, to give lectures, to conduct clinical trials, and occasionally to make presentations on their behalf at regulatory meetings or hearings.

http://chronicle.com/article/The-Secret-Lives-of-Big/124335/

[RandomThoughts]

1. People say that about me also That the presentation might be more then the content.

Although the content is there, and has taught me many things.


Although what I am saying is that those that think they know, really don't. There are people that say I get it wrong, I don't know for sure what those things might mean, the point is they can mean many things to many different people.

Constructing paradoxes, or contradictions in thought help people think about what they really feel and think.

And the flashy stuff should in theory get someone to see the other comments.

And then there is correcting the issue of beer and travel money due.


Also I can find streams that are really consistent in meaning in many lessons I learn and try to share if I see them. And in thoughts of those that think I see it wrong.

Some people in Islam would be offended by me saying virgins in heaven have nothing to do with sex, but I can show a hundred topics people think are about sex that are about love.

Some people in Judaism would be offended by me saying the stealing of birth right could be an example of how some claim divine right.

Some in Christianity might be offended by saying religion and money are different topics.


The point is, there are people that say they know what is going on, their is a trap in the supernatural it is thinking anyone can know everything about it, since it all is told and shown by things in the supernatural. So you have to find what makes sense and has meaning.

Although I found some basics, fear doesn't do any good. I found without fear, you can learn and see things much easier without any queasy feeling some get.

Nobody can be sure, so might be best to be kind and express your views, but not beat others into believing as you do.

The beer and travel pay from the supernatural side is only there if you sign up to do something for some group. If you just think and express without selling thoughts, that part doesn't lead to any material gain, or hasn't yet at least.




Here is one for the Abrahamic faiths, the conversation between Abraham and God about saving the town, it says he argued about how many righteous people he had to find. But God knew how many he would find, so what was the conversation really about? Why didn't God just tell him how many he would find, and that the town would not be saved.

What is the meaning of that conversation, it was taught in church that it was about God having conversation and people having a role, but in that example, The conversation did not have a role, but only either a motivating factor, or a perception of a role in that decision.

What is the reason or meaning of that conversation? I think it is more about 'that is what they understand'. That it helped him feel he tried to save that town.

What about Jona, not being willing to go help out some town by his own anger? He was eventually made to go by some punishment or stress. In that case the person was made to go do something to help a town.

:shrug:

That is why many think in no free will concepts. Those are examples of someone made to do something. Even Paul was blinded, and then spoke about kicking against a stone.

So some people are going to do some things it seems. Or maybe not.

Personally I am going to be my own person, and be who I want to be, and if that fits into some plan great, if not that is great also.

But I will have beer and travel money and many good experiences, and I also will post thoughts, like I use to discuss at work when I worked, at the bar when I use to go there, and here on the internet even if read or not.

And they will be part of something, since everything is. Although not being around people makes them almost more of a diary then posts, still they are an expression of thoughts.

See my point?

[JDPriestly]

2. Random Thoughts, I've never INTENTIONALLY placed a DUER

on ignore, but you are tempting me.

I often get accused of being off topic, but your random thoughts are a little to random even for me. Maybe you should be either taking your meds or writing a stream of conscious novel.

Here's hoping you have as much humor when your posts are put down as you seem to think others should have when you put their posts down.

Anyway, in good fun -- could you please stick to one topic or maybe two are three so that we can all follow you? I can't tell whether you have something interesting to say or not. Please.

[RandomThoughts]

3. Thank you for the kindness.

I realized that post was off topic, by the comment as diary, and agree that it probably is not best to put it in a thread you wanted to discuss a different topic about.

However your post matched some other thoughts, not sure where else to express them.

It is an issue, my self proclaimed need to express thoughts, should not limit others that want to follow some topic like you posted on. My comment was more of a diary entry, but it fit with your post.

I was not putting your post down at all, and try not to do that.


My point was this, there are some things that I know many people think on, that without seeing them they are hard to explain, but that is true with most beliefs. So they become mostly interpretations.


I do agree that last post was a bit over the top. Not been around people in awhile, so that happens sometimes.



I would self medicate, but don't have beer or travel money :)

I realize why you don't understand it, I assume people have read other posts.

[JDPriestly]

5. Yes, I'm always a little puzzled, but intrigued so I thought I

would say something. It's frustrating to know that someone has something interesting to say but for some reason doesn't say it easily.

There are truths in what you express. But it is hard for me to follow the thread of your thought as you weave through your ideas. Seriously, I think novelists sometimes prepare to write stories through the kind of associative process you are using as you write.

[RandomThoughts]

7. Possibly.

Although I don't think it is preparing to write a story, but more like when you remember a story.

Most times when someone remembers events they don't tell those things in chronological order, but remember different pieces at different times.

So many of my posts are pieces of different stories that tell a similar story. But in my mind their are concepts from earlier posts that I think of when writing another post, but without those concepts, the post makes less sense.

Also it is possible to say many things with same concept.

Although many of my thoughts are parts of stories I want to write, they are also like looking at pieces of other stories written.

For me to make that most completely understandable would take 1000s of pages, so sorta write in a short hand that relies on other parts already written, instead of writing them again. It is a concept that is the same in all language, even the use of words is using concepts stored in words for people.

If a politician says we must defend freedom, they are invoking the different thoughts of what freedom and defend means in different people. That is why a value voters summit can seem silly when you listen to the speeches, but when other people hear them they get really excited. It depends what is in the macros for each word said, for each listener.


Speaking in language, even simple language of words, is really opening the macros for each word said, and using those macros to open a form of feeling, if done a certain way, someone can be rallied, another might just shrug, if you know how their macros are loaded, you can pick a series of words that open those macros in a sequence that for those with certain loaded macros forms a resonance wave in their feeling, while others don't see any of the concepts.

That is sorta the concepts of doors to the heart, where different words form keys to different locks. Although many people have so many locks on their heart, shrug, so sometimes showing them what is in their own macros making up each notch in a key that would fit their door, while making a comment while doing that, kicks in a door. you can key to a persons locks, or show them what is in their own macros then they unlock their own doors. Or something like that, not exactly right there. Probably have to think on that awhile to say it right.

Or maybe not, would have to think on it more to get it more accurate, but basically 'pushing someones buttons' is sequencing a set of words, images, or thoughts, that fits their locks to some emotion, in that context not always the best emotion, in the same way, concepts or words can form keys to locks on hearts for compassion, reason, and understanding also. But if you don't have that lock, or a different lock, or no locks, then the concept does not have any release of any stored feeling for that person in the pattern. So if you feel compassion already, some concept to unlock compassion would not have any noticeable effect, same with some sequence that makes some angry, if you don't have anger, or already released it, such a thing would not have an effect.

Or something like that.


For example, the post
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=105&topic_id=9506323&mesg_id=9507891

is a comment based on a previous comment about how ironic it is that the far right goes against Sharia law while having their own Sharia law, I find that funny, but if you did not see the same context, it might seem like something else. But a few people that read both posts and see the soldier symbol on the shield, and T hair on the hats, and the cylon masks, would understand the irony of it. Then it shows what they think of as giving water is a bit different then other peoples thoughts on that topic.

[JDPriestly]

8. I think you are a poet. I understand that. It's like the music of language

or language as music. That is a good way to hear the hearts beat. So keep it up.

[MedicalAdmin]

4. And if I may add this small bon mot.

I think that your random thoughts, although sometimes interesting (and usually much less controversial than I think you think they are), suffer due to a lack of cohesive grouping of thoughts, also known as paragraphs.

Frankly your ideas would recieve a much better reception if you took a few minutes to compose and coalate your thoughts from completely random to at least semi random. Unless of course you do need to medicate and are unable to do that easily, in which case, IMHO, you should just do what you are already doing.

If you can't find acceptance here, where can you?

[greymattermom]

6. yikes I am one

I'm one of those "thought leaders" but I always try to speak clearly. The groups I talk to ask good questions and seem to understand things quite well. This story seems unlikely to me. To evaluate it, you need to know the audience and actually see the powerpoint slides. I also doubt that the CME evaluations are poor when the meal is good. Many of the attendees are there for the food.