If they don’t do that, investors will turn to other places to invest their money, and the companies will shrivel up and either be sold to another company or die. So the answer to the Sorkin/George question is “both”. A pharmaceutical company’s business is making drugs and, in doing so it had better make …show more content…
Because medical students are not yet in a power position and do not have the ability to prescribe pharmaceuticals the conversation surrounding their relationship with pharmaceuticals sales representatives is not as commonly had, however it is still an issue. When a medical student receives a gift from a pharmaceutical sales representative they are indebted to them to some degree. The gifts medical students receive from pharmaceutical sales representatives can range from something small like a pen or meal or they can be large gift such as sponsorship with medical school. Even if a quid pro quo relationship isn’t developed the potential for hidden strings or reciprocal obligations may still be present. It is argued that medical students shouldn’t be able to have contact with pharmaceutical sales representatives (Rogers). Pharmaceutical sales representatives have been developing relationships with physicians for years but in the 1980’s a large boom in the relationships occurred. The ethical behavior of pharmaceutical sales representatives giving gifts to physicians is typically seen as wrong but other than material gifts physicians can also be gifted drug samples. Drug samples are viewed as more of a gift to patients than to physicians (Marco). The Kaiser Family Foundation reports that pharmaceutical companies gave drug samples to physicians with a retail value of $16.4