鈥淚F SCIENTISTS want to do good for the developing world, it鈥檚 hard to think of an industry where they鈥檙e going to make more of a contribution.鈥� So says Guy Willis, director of communications at the International Federation of Pharmaceutical Manufacturers and Associations (IFPMA) in Geneva, Switzerland.
It鈥檚 a bold claim, one based on the of its philanthropic contributions towards achieving the health aspects of the UN鈥檚 . While pharmaceutical firms do give substantially towards the building of healthcare infrastructure in poor countries, they have also been accused of overpricing, attempting to patent drugs based on traditional remedies and being indifferent to finding cures for diseases of the developing world. What鈥檚 more, the companies seem to hit the headlines just as often for mis-selling drugs or misrepresenting the results of clinical trials as for their therapeutic discoveries. Yet it鈥檚 hard to ignore the allure of working in the industry. It鈥檚 well remunerated and offers the chance to do potentially ground-breaking research. So can you work for big pharma with a clear conscience, and how do you figure out which firms shine in the ethical credibility stakes?
Two obvious starting points are the , an index of multinationals published by a Geneva-based company, and the 2008 , issued by a charity in Haarlem, the Netherlands. The AMI assesses pharmaceutical companies on their performance in areas like equitable pricing and the licensing of drugs to developing countries so that affordable versions can be made locally. Useful though both league tables are, making rigorous judgements in this area is tricky, and both lists rely partly on submissions from the companies themselves as well as media reports.
Advertisement
Nevertheless, there鈥檚 plenty from the drug companies themselves to get your teeth into. 鈥淭he 鈥楻esponsibility鈥� part of our website makes up over a third of ,鈥� says Julia King of GlaxoSmithKline, which topped the AMI and was also the best-ranked pharmaceutical firm in the most recent Covalence ranking. It鈥檚 not just about working 鈥渋n partnership with society鈥�, she says, but about recruiting and motivating top-notch staff. 鈥淵ou鈥檙e not just competing on salary and benefits now, you鈥檙e competing on how your business is seen.鈥�
聯You鈥檙e not just competing on salary and benefits, you鈥檙e competing on how your business is seen聰
What about the accusations of misconduct, misrepresentation and worse often levelled at big pharma? 鈥淚f a company isn鈥檛 prepared to report on, for example, the publication of clinical trial data, then one has to question how prepared it is to be called to account publicly,鈥� says King. For its part, GSK has an online 鈥溾�� to publish the results of trials it sponsors. Another top tip, she says, is to ensure a company you might want to work for has a robust sales and marketing code and that it is prepared to document breaches and ensuing disciplinary action. Usefully, the 鈥淓thical promotion鈥� section of the IFPMA website publishes member companies鈥� codes in addition to the federation鈥檚 own marketing practices code, which binds members in countries with little or no regulation of their own. 鈥淭hat means a lot of the developing world,鈥� says Willis.
Then there鈥檚 pricing and patenting 鈥� two complex, interrelated areas, with different companies adopting different strategies in each market. It鈥檚 a mixed picture here, highlighted by the case of the leukaemia drug Glivec, made by the Swiss firm Novartis. Willis says the drug can be administered for free under the company鈥檚 means-tested programme, but also points out that Glivec has been the subject of a controversial by Novartis in India. Clearly, the tussle between multinationals and national regulators won鈥檛 go away any time soon.
At least big pharma鈥檚 growing commitment to researching the diseases of poorer nations is relatively uncontentious. 鈥淭here鈥檚 going to be even more funding and more opportunities. Philanthropists like Bill Gates are pushing very strongly in that direction, and also international organisations like the WHO,鈥� says Martin Pan, a researcher at GSK鈥檚 research centre near Madrid, Spain. It鈥檚 one of several big pharma labs and institutes operated in partnership with NGOs, where you will find opportunities to work on treatments for diseases such as malaria and sleeping sickness. For their part, the NGOs provide some of the funding and also the chance to get involved in field trials, with all the logistical and cultural complications those entail. 鈥淭he concept of informed consent is well understood in the western world,鈥� says Pan. 鈥淎 lot of people have participated in those trials during their student life. In other cultural settings, this is maybe not that usual.鈥�
GSK is also investing in the development of a malaria vaccine 鈥� called 鈥� even though it is unlikely to be a big money-spinner. 鈥淧eople are not going to be queuing up for the jabs at our travel clinic,鈥� says Colin Sutherland, a malaria specialist at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (LSHTM). The reason is simply that the vaccine confers only modest protection. Even so, it will be a boon to poor countries, as people who contract malaria despite being vaccinated will experience milder symptoms and are much less able to spread the parasite to uninfected mosquitoes, so reducing transmission of the disease.
So you can make a difference in big pharma or, for that matter, in a health NGO or contract research organisation, to which drug companies farm out projects such as clinical trials. There鈥檚 no standard route in, though (see 鈥淥ne job, two paths鈥�). 鈥淚t is very multidisciplinary, the whole area of global health research, drug access, delivery and quality assurance,鈥� says Shunmay Yeung, who also works on malaria at LSHTM. That said, a life sciences or biomedical background is often required, and these days postgraduate qualifications are increasingly important, though not necessarily in a purely scientific discipline. Whatever your route in, there certainly seems to be a growing number of opportunities to be a part of the pharma industry while keeping your conscience clear.
Case study One job, two paths
Both Manica Balasegaram and Sally Ellis are staff at the , an NGO in Geneva, Switzerland, working on clinical trials involving visceral leishmaniasis, the second-largest parasitic killer in the world after malaria. Yet they have had very different career paths.
鈥淚 stumbled into it,鈥� says Balasegaram, who worked as a medic in a UK hospital A&E department before heading to east Africa with M茅decins Sans Fronti猫res. His experiences there of treating visceral leishmaniasis and other diseases made him 鈥渇rustrated with the limited treatment options, which were quite toxic and in some cases not particularly effective鈥�. That spurred him to work on tropical diseases.
Ellis, on the other hand, has worked for big pharma. She got into the industry through a lucky break. Having graduated in immunology at King鈥檚 College London, she wrote to a company asking about work experience and was invited to a job interview instead. Her present role often takes her to east Africa and south Asia where, she says, 鈥測ou鈥檙e much more aware of the help that you鈥檙e giving鈥� in improving medical treatment. 鈥淵ou can get that sense from the pharmaceutical industry as well but, for me, it was never quite as apparent.鈥�