AddThis Feed Button "Frequently Copied, Never Duplicated"

Showing posts with label conflict of interest. Show all posts
Showing posts with label conflict of interest. Show all posts

Wednesday, January 18, 2012

Doctors Required to Report Payments from Drug and Device Firms


UPDATE: 26 January
Dialing for Doctors - 

18 January
To head off medical conflicts of interest, the Obama administration is poised to require drug companies to disclose the payments they make to doctors for research, consulting, speaking, travel and entertainment.
Many researchers have found evidence that such payments can influence doctors’ treatment decisions and contribute to higher costs by encouraging the use of more expensive drugs and medical devices.
Consumer advocates and members of Congress say patients may benefit from the new standards, being issued by the government under the new health care law. Officials said the disclosures increased the likelihood that doctors would make decisions in the best interests of patients, without regard to the doctors’ financial interests.  

Monday, February 14, 2011

Dr. Wakefield: Was Attack Based on Conflict of Interest?

Quick Vaccine Facts

As reported by the New England Journal of Medicine - 35% of adverse reports for rheumatoid arthritis are associated with MMR.

Rubella vaccine caused 55% of RA cases 1991-1998 in girls.

1 of 3 damaged neurologically from DPT;  35,000 yearly.

Pertussis: Babies die 7 times greater within 3 days of vaccination.  Reported as SIDS.  Journal of Pediatrics shows only 40-45% non-sustained effectiveness.  In an Ohio outbreak, 82% of those vaccinated developed the disease.
Is it just conceivably possible, that the BMJ's decision to commission and publish Brian Deer's series of  articles attacking Dr. Andrew Wakefield's personal and scientific integrity--without giving him an opportunity to defend himself--and to lend its unwavering editorial endorsement to the charges--might be influenced by a SIGNIFICANT financial conflict of interest? 

In 2008, the pharmaceutical giant, Merck, signed a partnership agreement with the BMJ Group that effectively gave the company control of 350 interactive continuing medical education courses in over 20 medical therapy areas?

In 2009, The Lancet also entered into a Merck partnership. 

"This unique partnership will change the face of medical education in Europe and beyond, allowing users access to most of BMJ Learning's library of 'Continuing Medical Education' (CME) and 'Continuing Professional Development' (CPD) content. " 
More: http://www.thefreelibrary.com/MSD+Signs+Partnership+With+BMJ+Group.-a0180213953

Why did the BMJ conceal from readers--of both the Deer series and the BMJ editorial excoriating Dr. Andrew Wakefield, charging him with deliberate fraud and financial conflict of interest--the fact that the BMJ had a partnership with Merck, manufacturer of 13 vaccines--including the MMR vaccine, which is at the center of the Wakefield controversy?  

The BMJ editorial accompanying Deer's articles, did its best to lend authority to the vaccine industry (Merck's) perspective. In an introductory sound bite the editors declare: "Clear evidence of falsification of data should now close the door on this damaging vaccine scare."
Read more.... http://www.ahrp.org/cms/content/view/766/9/