"The Glaxo case is the latest and biggest in a series of Justice Department prosecutions of Big..."

“The Glaxo case is the latest and biggest in a series of Justice Department prosecutions of Big Pharma for illegal marketing prescription drugs. … The Department says the prosecutions are well worth the effort. By one estimate it’s recovered more than $15 for every $1 it’s spent. But what’s the point if the fines are small relative to the profits, if the wrong people are feeling the financial pinch, and if no executive is held accountable? The only way to get big companies like these to change their behavior is to make the individuals responsible feel the heat. An even more basic issue is why the advertising and marketing of prescription drugs is allowed at all, when consumers can’t buy them and shouldn’t be influencing doctor’s decisions anyway. Before 1997, the Food and Drug Administration banned such advertising on TV and radio. That ban should be resurrected. Finally, there’s no good reason why doctors should be allowed to accept any perks at all from [drug] companies… It’s an inherent conflict of interest. Codes of ethics that are supposed to limit such gifts obviously don’t work. All perks should be banned, and doctors that accept them should be subject to potential loss of their license to practice.”

- Economist’s View: Bigger is Not Always Better