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: 17816

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

Rockey SJ, Collins FS
Managing Financial Conflict of Interest in Biomedical Research
JAMA 2010 May 24; 303:(23):
http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/extract/jama.2010.774v1


Abstract:

As the nation’s biomedical research agency, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) must ensure that the research it funds on the behalf of US taxpayers is scientifically rigorous and free of bias. Over the course of more than 65 years and hundreds of thousands of awards, most researchers receiving funds from NIH have proved to be trustworthy stewards. Still, more must be done to retain, and in some instances regain, public trust in the biomedical and behavioral research enterprise.

The public may not always understand the intricacies of rigorous science, but most individuals quickly grasp the concept of bias. Plain and simple, Americans do not want financial conflicts of interest (FCOI) to influence the federally funded research they hope will yield better ways to fight disease and improve health.

Managing FCOI in biomedical and behavioral research, however, can prove to be . . .

 

  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