corner
Healthy Skepticism
Join us to help reduce harm from misleading health information.
Increase font size   Decrease font size   Print-friendly view   Print
Register Log in

Healthy Skepticism Library item: 6463

Warning: This library includes all items relevant to health product marketing that we are aware of regardless of quality. Often we do not agree with all or part of the contents.

 

Publication type: Journal Article

Sterns EE.
Relations with the pharmaceutical industry.
CMAJ 1994 Aug 15; 151:(4):414-5
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pubmed&pubmedid=8055398


Abstract:

The author’s experience leads him to question Ms. Erola’s assertion that “the PMAC does not attempt to influence debate through threats or intimidation, or such irresponsible activity as ‘major reprisals’ or ‘subtle reprisals.’” He recounts how the executive director of the Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Association of Canada had sent him a letter criticizing remarks he had made before a government committee. In addition the letter was sent to the dean of the medical school where he worked, the associate dean of research and two scientists funded by PMAC. The author considers this a form of intimidation.

Keywords:
*letter to the editor/Canada/intimidation/ Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Association of Canada/academic freedom/PROMOTION DISGUISED: DISINFORMATION AND HARASSMENT Canada Drug Industry* Interprofessional Relations* Schools, Medical*

 

  Healthy Skepticism on RSS   Healthy Skepticism on Facebook   Healthy Skepticism on Twitter

Please
Click to Register

(read more)

then
Click to Log in
for free access to more features of this website.

Forgot your username or password?

You are invited to
apply for membership
of Healthy Skepticism,
if you support our aims.

Pay a subscription

Support our work with a donation

Buy Healthy Skepticism T Shirts


If there is something you don't like, please tell us. If you like our work, please tell others.

Email a Friend








Cases of wilful misrepresentation are a rarity in medical advertising. For every advertisement in which nonexistent doctors are called on to testify or deliberately irrelevant references are bunched up in [fine print], you will find a hundred or more whose greatest offenses are unquestioning enthusiasm and the skill to communicate it.

The best defence the physician can muster against this kind of advertising is a healthy skepticism and a willingness, not always apparent in the past, to do his homework. He must cultivate a flair for spotting the logical loophole, the invalid clinical trial, the unreliable or meaningless testimonial, the unneeded improvement and the unlikely claim. Above all, he must develop greater resistance to the lure of the fashionable and the new.
- Pierre R. Garai (advertising executive) 1963