At what point do we become Welie Lilly

I am confused. Since my life at Lilly has been from the Research and Development side it seems strange to me that there are such strong feelings from the Lilly sales reps.
Having looked at the threads regarding Strattera and Zyprexa it would indicate that at some point the Lilly position for a new compound causes us to exaggerate claims to the point that we have developed a nick name of "Welie Lilly".
So at what point does that happen? From the Research side we look at activity levels, ED50's, IC50's, toxicology from animal studies, etc. When a compound reaches Phase 1 Clinical Trial, the basic research side becomes less of a factor except to examine side effects and go over the assays that caused a particular position to be taken. Is this when you think problems occur? Or as a compound goes through the various Clinical Trial Phases in people, do you think lies begin here, prior to FDA approval? If one looks at the whole study of Pharmacology, it includes the Effect Drugs have on People and the Effect People have on Drugs. Not everyone is going to helped by a particular drug (because of side effects or dosage) but many people will be helped. This can even go back to the Oraflex issue. Many people received dramatic improvement with Oraflex, but older people obviously had problems particularly if the dosage was too high. I knew a number of Lilly folks who took Oraflex that were really upset when it was pulled from the market. Was this a big lie to them? I believe rational minds would realize that these folks lost a drug that was the only one on the market at the time which helped them, not to mention the impact of bad publicity on the sales of other Lilly drugs.
So where are we? If not all people are helped by a new drug, is it a lie and if so at what point?
Please do not think that my support of Lilly is all encompassing. It is not! I am very worried about the future at Lilly. I am concerned that the upper management are pulling salaries from greed and not from a desire to help others (which is what pharmaceutical research used to mean to those of us in basic research). This was a company that used to manufacture "orphan drugs" at a loss because nothing else was out there to help certain groups with particular low profile illnesses. I have seen a company move from being employee oriented to stockholder oriented. It is now a company with no loyalty to either side. Employees sweat whether they will have a job in the future. I have seen the company make decisions that angered the rank and file employees (including the firing of Vaughn Bryson when hundreds of Lilly employees stood in the mall at the Corporate Center in support of Bryson, who came out after his firing and encouraged us to move on. He was a man of integrity and loyal to the people who worked to make Lilly a top notch company. A man of his ilk has not been evident in the present leadership). I would never recommend to someone I like to apply for employment at Lilly because of what I know but the reality is those who are new hires do not know how much the company has changed. I question the idea that Lilly is a "family friendly" employer. Those new hires in the exempt level, seem to work many more hours than the 40 most people work. The child care centers allow them to put those extra hours in and not have to worry about their care, but is this family friendly? I do not think so. People I talk to on a regular basis without exception, do not like the present day Lilly! So are we without a voice? Not with this forum as a way to voice our concerns but what does bother me is if there is proof that Lilly is giving its sales reps information that is not factual and we are in fact Welie Lilly. If we are, then the ethical thing to do is to present your facts to the FDA and let them sort it out. What do you think?

Oh for cryin out loud. Increase your dose from 5 mg to 10 and call us back in a week.

Sumner? That You?

Unfortunately the side effects that occur, specifically for Zyprexa, did so in postmarketing; therefore, it becomes incumbent upon marketing, not research to take responsibility for what is going on. For years no one was doing that although time and time again patients were not only gaining weight but also developing diabetes. Welielily is an appropriate name because your company does whatever it can to avoid accountability outside the auspices of the FDA.

I am a rep with another company. However, I have experienced many of the thingd that Lilly reps have and are experiening. For me the lies, deceiving, and crap have nothing to do with the R&D side. I have a lot of respect for pharmas researchers and applaude your work. As reps we have to deal with jerk DM's (not all are) who use their position as a power trip. Then again the DM's have to deal with jerk RM's (again not all are). So on and so on all the way to the top. Many times the probs are in marketing. But mosly with unethical higher ups who are greedy and power hungry bastards. This entire industry is under the puplic microscope and more bad things for the industry will happen unless these bastards shape up or the board of directors sacks them!!!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I am confused. Since my life at Lilly has been from the Research and Development side it seems strange to me that there are such strong feelings from the Lilly sales reps.
Having looked at the threads regarding Strattera and Zyprexa it would indicate that at some point the Lilly position for a new compound causes us to exaggerate claims to the point that we have developed a nick name of "Welie Lilly".
So at what point does that happen? From the Research side we look at activity levels, ED50's, IC50's, toxicology from animal studies, etc. When a compound reaches Phase 1 Clinical Trial, the basic research side becomes less of a factor except to examine side effects and go over the assays that caused a particular position to be taken. Is this when you think problems occur? Or as a compound goes through the various Clinical Trial Phases in people, do you think lies begin here, prior to FDA approval? If one looks at the whole study of Pharmacology, it includes the Effect Drugs have on People and the Effect People have on Drugs. Not everyone is going to helped by a particular drug (because of side effects or dosage) but many people will be helped. This can even go back to the Oraflex issue. Many people received dramatic improvement with Oraflex, but older people obviously had problems particularly if the dosage was too high. I knew a number of Lilly folks who took Oraflex that were really upset when it was pulled from the market. Was this a big lie to them? I believe rational minds would realize that these folks lost a drug that was the only one on the market at the time which helped them, not to mention the impact of bad publicity on the sales of other Lilly drugs.
So where are we? If not all people are helped by a new drug, is it a lie and if so at what point?
Please do not think that my support of Lilly is all encompassing. It is not! I am very worried about the future at Lilly. I am concerned that the upper management are pulling salaries from greed and not from a desire to help others (which is what pharmaceutical research used to mean to those of us in basic research). This was a company that used to manufacture "orphan drugs" at a loss because nothing else was out there to help certain groups with particular low profile illnesses. I have seen a company move from being employee oriented to stockholder oriented. It is now a company with no loyalty to either side. Employees sweat whether they will have a job in the future. I have seen the company make decisions that angered the rank and file employees (including the firing of Vaughn Bryson when hundreds of Lilly employees stood in the mall at the Corporate Center in support of Bryson, who came out after his firing and encouraged us to move on. He was a man of integrity and loyal to the people who worked to make Lilly a top notch company. A man of his ilk has not been evident in the present leadership). I would never recommend to someone I like to apply for employment at Lilly because of what I know but the reality is those who are new hires do not know how much the company has changed. I question the idea that Lilly is a "family friendly" employer. Those new hires in the exempt level, seem to work many more hours than the 40 most people work. The child care centers allow them to put those extra hours in and not have to worry about their care, but is this family friendly? I do not think so. People I talk to on a regular basis without exception, do not like the present day Lilly! So are we without a voice? Not with this forum as a way to voice our concerns but what does bother me is if there is proof that Lilly is giving its sales reps information that is not factual and we are in fact Welie Lilly. If we are, then the ethical thing to do is to present your facts to the FDA and let them sort it out. What do you think?

The day that we stopped hiring Registered Pharmacists to populate our sales force.

I think the Welie Lilly had it's very beginning when Lilly developed Oraflex and brought it to market. I was a sales rep then, and we all had a very uneasy feeling about that goofy dermatologist who lied about the effects Oraflex had on blue-eyed, fair-skinned, and blond patients. Somehow we knew that something just wasn't right about that drug. It was a wonderful drug....I had doctors begging me not to send back the samples when it was finally pulled.

But the Welie Lilly environment grew from giving sales reps faulty information to feed to doctors to Lilly actually feeling comfortable about lying to employees. That has all come home now when Lilly is essentially admitting to us retirees that they lied when they told us about the benefits we would receive after retirement.

At the heart of the Welie Lilly environment is the board of directors. They allowed the lying to develop, and quickly became the wellspring of the lying and deception that continues. Lilly will never regain the credibility and respect it once had until we get a board of directors who posess a solid foundation of ethics.....ethics of discovery, ethics of marketing, ethics of business, and most of all, ethics in the treatment of employees.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Lilly will never regain the credibility and respect it once had until we get a board of directors who posess a solid foundation of ethics.....ethics of discovery, ethics of marketing, ethics of business, and most of all, ethics in the treatment of employees....

Mr. Taurel has damaged this company beyond repair. Since he became CEO in 1999, Every Department in the company has understood that the way to a sucessful career is to be DISHONEST !!

Fudge the numbers, inflate your Performance Appraisals, stab your co-workers and direct reports in the back, and when in doubt tell a Lie!!

That has been Mr. Taurel's Legact !!

Amen!!!!

Originally Posted by Anonymous

The day that we stopped hiring Registered Pharmacists to populate our sales force.

This is absolutely true. We became just like every other company with nothing to set us apart. The Lilly brand means nothing to docs anymore.