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: 19238

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

Hawkes N
Four drug companies breach industry’s code of practice
BMJ 2010 Dec 16; 341:
http://www.bmj.com/content/341/bmj.c7266.extract


Abstract:

Four drug companies have been found guilty of breaching the pharmaceutical industry code of practice and one, Novo Nordisk, has been publicly reprimanded for its behaviour.

The four breaches were deemed serious enough to justify placing advertisements in the BMJ, The Nursing Standard and The Pharmaceutical Journal, an action which is taken when companies are ruled to have reduced confidence in the industry, or are publicly reprimanded.

The four companies involved were Novo Nordisk, Eli Lilly, Grünenthal, and Napp Pharmaceuticals. The code is designed to set standards for the promotion and marketing of drugs and is adjudicated by the Prescription Medicines Code of Practice Authority.

Two complaints against Novo Nordisk were considered. In the first, which resulted from a complaint by Eli Lilly, Novo Nordisk was found to have promoted a diabetes drug, …

 

  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