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: 15379

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: news

Grogan K.
PMAs urged to cut funding from pharma down to 0%
Pharma Times 2009 Apr 1
http://www.pharmatimes.com/WorldNews/article.aspx?id=15604


Full text:

A group of well-known researchers and doctors are calling on professional medical associations (PMAs) to reduce their reliance on funding from the pharmaceutical sector in order to preserve their integrity.

Writing in the Journal of the American Medical Association, the authors said PMAs need to “work toward a goal of $0 contributions from industry,” excepting revenues from journal advertisements and exhibit hall fees. One of the authors, Steven Nissen, head of Department of Cardiovascular Medicine at the Cleveland Clinic Foundation, noted that PMAs “play a pivotal role in educating physicians and advancing the practice of medicine but they must be scientifically objective and avoid even the appearance of commercial bias”.

He claimed that “only a policy that precludes acceptance of outright financial support from industry can meet the most rigorous standards for independence and integrity”. Co-author James Scully, chief executive of the American Psychiatric Association, added that “we must develop a new model for our relationship with industry – one that is both transparent and clearly separates education from marketing”.

Another co-author, David Wofsy, a professor of medicine at the University of California San Francisco, said that “society will always face controversial issues on which the judgment of physicians and the best interests of patients may not align with the interests of the pharmaceutical industry”. As such, PMAs need to be able to respond to these issues “without allowing financial ties to undermine their credibility and without fearing that an independent political position might jeopardise their revenue stream”.

The authors acknowledge that achieving $0 support will “inevitably take time”, but say that PMAs should act “immediately” to restrict total industry support to no more than 25% of their operating budget. This interim goal would “begin to wean PMAs from industry support without putting their survival into jeopardy,” says the group.

The increase in the efforts by the US Congress to push for greater transparency and more stringent limits on pharmaceutical industry relationships with medicine, means that action is required now, the group says. Lead author David Rothman, president of the Institute on Medicine as a Profession at Columbia University, noted that “PMAs understand fully that they are at a turning point and the rules of the game have changed. Medicine has got to start taking leadership. If they don’t do it themselves, it will be done to them”.

 

  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








Far too large a section of the treatment of disease is to-day controlled by the big manufacturing pharmacists, who have enslaved us in a plausible pseudo-science...
The blind faith which some men have in medicines illustrates too often the greatest of all human capacities - the capacity for self deception...
Some one will say, Is this all your science has to tell us? Is this the outcome of decades of good clinical work, of patient study of the disease, of anxious trial in such good faith of so many drugs? Give us back the childlike trust of the fathers in antimony and in the lancet rather than this cold nihilism. Not at all! Let us accept the truth, however unpleasant it may be, and with the death rate staring us in the face, let us not be deceived with vain fancies...
we need a stern, iconoclastic spirit which leads, not to nihilism, but to an active skepticism - not the passive skepticism, born of despair, but the active skepticism born of a knowledge that recognizes its limitations and knows full well that only in this attitude of mind can true progress be made.
- William Osler 1909