Stephen Hall, "Prescription for Profit"

Questions for Making Connections Within the Reading:

1. In order to follow the argument in "Prescription for Profit," one needs to have a general understanding of what an antihistamine is and how it works. In your own words, describe what an antihistamine is for, who uses it, and how it works.

2. Stephen Hall's argument includes lots of numbers; indeed, to understand the argument that he is making, you need to be able to identify which numbers are important and to be able to explain why those numbers are important. What would you say are the three most important figures that appear in Hall's argument? What makes the figures you've selected more important than the other figures in "Prescription for Profit"? How did you decide which figures to pick?

3. The title for Hall's article, "Prescription for Profit," seems a clever play on words: the article describes how Claritin became successful and, in so doing, appears to prescribe the approach to creating a profitable prescription drug. What is the difference between description and prescription? If one wished to successfully market a pharmaceutical drug, what are the prescribed steps that are "recommended" here?

Questions for Writing:

1. Stephen Hall describes Claritin as "a drug for our time" and he says his goal in "Prescription for Profit" is to provide "the biography" of this drug. What does the success of Claritin tell us about our time, exactly? Does the success of this drug suggest that health-care reform is necessary, or does it establish that our health care system is working effectively as is? Can one have a first-rate health-care system without a commitment to profit?

2. Hall writes, "Establishing a drug's safety and efficacy is not a pretty business." The problem with determining whether a drug is safe and efficacious, according to Hall, is that all the research that is done to answer such questions is carried out by corporate scientists. If this is the problem, what is the solution? What is done currently to ensure that the health and welfare of those who use prescription drugs is protected? What other measures might be adopted?

Questions for Making Connections Between Readings:

1. In "Science in the Courtroom: Opinions Without Evidence," Marcia Angell describes the problems that arise when scientists are called into court to testify on behalf of parties who pay their salaries. What does Stephen Hall's account suggest about the objectivity of science outside the courtroom? Where might one find scientific research that is objective? Is such neutral research an achievable goal, or is it simply a professional ideal?

2. Can Malcolm Gladwell's theory about the importance of context accommodate the roles that chance and marketing have played in Claritin's success, or do we need some other theory to explain why some approaches to treating physical discomfort succeed and others fail? That is, did Claritin "tip" because of how it was marketed, because of its innate value to consumers, or for some other reason altogether?

More Hall assignments . . . .