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: 19512

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

Studdert DM, Mello MM, Brennan TA
Financial conflicts of interest in physician relationships with pharmaceutical companies--self regulation in the shadow of federal prosecution.
NEJM 2004 Oct 28; 351:1891-1900
http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMlim042229


Abstract:

The past two years have witnessed extraordinary regulatory ferment in the area of conflicts of interest involving physicians, especially conflicts arising in relationships with the pharmaceutical industry. Professional regulatory bodies, the pharmaceutical industry, and the government have all decided that physicians and drug manufacturers need stronger advice about appropriate relationships. In 2002, three leading professional organizations — the American Medical Association,1 the American College of Physicians,2 and the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education3 — issued or revamped guidelines regarding physicians’ interactions with drug companies. In July 2002, acting through its trade association, the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, . . .

 

  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