CLOGGED LOGIC. Recent medical journal studies reported that the Cypher drug-eluting stent by Johnson & Johnson’s Cordis Corp. unit clinically performs better than the Taxus model offered by market leader and primary rival Boston Scientific Corp. So why then does Boston Scientific’s product remain the market leader? Simple supply and demand. According to the surgeon study authors, the Boston Scientific product "holds an edge on availability, deliverability, and cost." Since these studies were published Cordis’ market share spiked to about 40 percent of the market, up from about 33 percent at the beginning of 2005, the authors noted. An interventional cardiologist at Mt. Sinai Medical Center in New York blames it on production. "One of the biggest limits is the inability of J&J to manufacture enough stents to meet their demand," he said. "This is the classical case where the science speaks for a better product, but the product is not available all over." Naturally, Cordis responded by saying the company was "ramping up to meet growing demand." Some patients died during the studies, which raises the question of where the Medical Device Manufacturers Association was in decrying this? After all, the MDMA was quick to prop up and parade doctors before a Senate subcommittee a few years ago, whining about how restrictive GPO contracts from Novation and Premier prevented certain technologies from getting into doctors’ hands, thereby killing babies. How unfortunate that GPOs can’t be blamed for these manufacturers’ mishaps, huh?

HARA KIRI? The Wall Street Journal Online reported that Hitachi came under fire by the Food and Drug Administration for the company’s failure to report its MRI and PET scanning machines allegedly contributed to patient injuries. Most curious, however, (but probably coincidental) was who "sponsored" the space in which this story ran: Toshiba.

GET REAL. The New York Times reported that insurance companies, which have been attempting to manage healthcare costs, continue to prosper and increase their profits even as those costs keep climbing. But analysts indicate there may be trouble ahead for organizations like WellPoint, UnitedHealth and Cigna because their Wall Street ratings have been dropping. Please. Over on the left coast The Los Angeles Times reported that PacifiCare executives stand to reap $230 million from the United Healthcare "merger." Who’s kidding whom? The only events that will rope payers back to reality are an outright revolt among consumers and healthcare facilities (and just how effective or realistic is that?) to boycott working with these companies, rally more Eliot Spitzer types to fire up the masses or encourage an act of Congress (whose members receive many lucrative contributions courtesy of your insurance premiums).

MAMMO VOLLEY. Like a tennis match – or maybe Olympic beach volleyball – clinicians and scientists continue their debate over the benefits and relevance of mammograms in detecting cancerous tumors. If you follow the media (trade and consumer) about every six to 12 months a study emerges from the research haze. The first extols the virtues of mammography for breast cancer prevention, and then the next one bursts out of the fog lambasting the previous studies. Doctors tell women to get a mammogram at least yearly; then another group of doctors says it really doesn’t matter. One wonders if the debate is somehow tied to operational budgets and reimbursement – giving the old supply-and-demand a little nudge. Either way, women deserve a clear, concise and credible study that solves the conundrum once and for all – regardless of money. Otherwise, this medical community just looks like a bunch of boobs.

REBRAND CEOS! We launched our inaugural award for "supply chain-minded CEOs" back in January because we felt that top administrators, by and large, were branded and given a bad rap about their involvement in supply chain operations. Sure, many fit the stereotype of the aloof, can’t-be-bothered-about-box-moving business executive who believes the GPO and/or distributor should assume that headache for them. But some don’t. We knew that and you showed us some of them. Because it worked so well the first time we’re embarking on a sequel. Our second annual "S.U.R.E. Award for Supply Chain Focused CEOs" once again is looking to recognize chief executives who support, understand, recognize and empower the materials management department to do what needs to be done to achieve bottom-line savings and top-line revenue. Recommend worthy candidates for recognition in our January 2006 issue by e-mailing us reasons how and why they deserve the spotlight – no more than a couple of paragraphs are needed for each of the four S.U.R.E. categories. Please keep in mind that GPO support is commendable but we’re looking for details beyond that. Help us share the stories of these remarkable CEOs.