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: 4431

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

Swanson RW.
Three cheers for CME?
Canadian Medical Association Journal 1992; 146:1519


Abstract:

The author presented a seminar during which he mentioned that there was no difference between three drugs in a certain class, one of which was made by the company that was sponsoring the seminar and paying an honorarium to the author. A sales representative for the company was disturbed by this statement and attempted to convince the author otherwise. The author also pointed out that trying to influence his speech was contrary to the code of the Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Association of Canada.

Keywords:
*letter to the editor/Canada/continuing medical education/honoraria/corporate funding/guidelines, discussion of/sales representatives/ conference speakers/ guidelines, discussion of/PROMOTION DISGUISED: COMPANY SPONSORED SPEAKING TOURS AND CONFERENCE SPEAKERS/PROMOTION DISGUISED: SUPPORT FOR CME

 

  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








...to influence multinational corporations effectively, the efforts of governments will have to be complemented by others, notably the many voluntary organisations that have shown they can effectively represent society’s public-health interests…
A small group known as Healthy Skepticism; formerly the Medical Lobby for Appropriate Marketing) has consistently and insistently drawn the attention of producers to promotional malpractice, calling for (and often securing) correction. These organisations [Healthy Skepticism, Médecins Sans Frontières and Health Action International] are small, but they are capable; they bear malice towards no one, and they are inscrutably honest. If industry is indeed persuaded to face up to its social responsibilities in the coming years it may well be because of these associations and others like them.
- Dukes MN. Accountability of the pharmaceutical industry. Lancet. 2002 Nov 23; 360(9346)1682-4.