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: 13733

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

Stafford N.
MEPs shun cancer advocacy group because of industry funding
BMJ 2008 May 3; 336:(7651):980
http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/extract/336/7651/980-a?etoc


Abstract:

A group of members of the European parliament with a special interest in breast cancer has cut its ties with a breast cancer advocacy group, Europa Donna, because of the group’s acceptance of financial support from drug companies.

Karin Jöns, chairman of the European parliamentary group on breast cancer (EPGBC), issued a press release last week announcing the decision, saying that 86% of Europa Donna’s income of about 424 000 (£330 000; $660 000) in 2007 came from the industry.

“We at EPGBC reject further cooperation with Europa Donna because the board of the European umbrella group became more and more a lobby instrument for the market interests of the big pharmaceutical companies,” said Mrs Jöns, an MEP representing the Bremen region in Germany.

Europa Donna’s executive director, Susan Knox, rejected the press statement from Mrs Jöns, saying that it had “always denied a financial dependency from the pharmaceutical industry.”

. . .

 

  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