pharma eats media

[Guest guest]

This is no surprise. I recently saw a review of the JUPITER study on NJN news. It was a completely unadulterated infomercial.This is not science. This is not practicing medicine. This is selling products--often to people who do NOT need them. Where worldwide millions who DO are denied them. That, in my view, is economic genocide. It amazes me. A few years ago, Kofi Anaan said the Global Fund would need about $10 billion per year to address the myriad needs for AIDS. AND TB and malaria. But gosh, isn't that so MUCH MONEY?And yet...we spend that much on a war brought to us under false pretences in Iraq and then botched...and the current orgy of shoveling billions into companies "too big to fail" who give nothing back...yet, let's see...millions of lives in Africa, Asia, the Americas....those are collectively not big enough that they can die?Meanwhile, I'm sick. And I can't afford to see a doctor. And I can watch the news and every other ad is about some drug I should ask my doctor about. M. ****http://eatg.org/eatg/Global-HIV-News/Pharma-Industry/Pharma-and-its-influence-on-the-media 24/11/2008Pharma and its influence on the mediaGrowing evidence from the biomedical literature indicates that industry sponsorship matters, because it is associated with more favorable research outcomes and because interactions with the industry result in more prescribing of the sponsor’s drug.Who is watching the watchdog? That’s a question posed in an essay in BMJ. The authors caution doctors that drugmakers may be quietly influencing some media by endowing university chairs or underwriting professional groups; fund journalism awards; sponsor video material with high-profile broadcasters, and hire public relations firms to contract with freelance writers (whose ranks are growing as newspapers throw staffers overboard) to compose stories for trade mags.“Financial ties between medical journalists and for-profit companies they cover in their reporting have received little attention in the media or from the research community,” they write. “Such ties warrant scrutiny, not least because many of us first learn about new treatments from the news media, and these reports can affect the way the public uses health care. The media also affect medical practice by influencing the medical literature: journal articles that get media coverage are more likely to be subsequently cited, regardless of the article’s intrinsic value…“One of the more astonishing forms of financial ties between journalists and drug companies is the sponsored award, which often involves lucrative cash prizes or opportunities for international travel,” they write. An example: Lilly and Boehringer Ingelheim have co-sponsored an award for ‘reporting on urinary incontinence,’ carrying a prize of international travel. Boehringer has an award for reporting on ‘chronic obstructive pulmonary disease,’ offering prizes worth (about $6,400) each…The essay goes on to note some awards are sponsored by organizations that are heavily funded by industry, such as the non-profit Mental Health America. Its 2007 annual report shows that almost half of its funds came from drugmakers, including more than $1 million each from Bristol Myers Squibb, Lilly, and Wyeth.Why should you care? “Growing evidence from the biomedical literature indicates that industry sponsorship matters, because it is associated with more favorable research outcomes and because interactions with the industry result in more prescribing of the sponsor’s drug. We suspect that entanglement may also matter in journalism,” the authors conclude.[Our thought: To keep it simple, industry funding for training, education and awards is not a good idea. And any conflict should be disclosed. Full disclosure: we belong to the Association of Health Care Journalists, which has strict rules about such things.]By Ed SilvermanPharmalothttp://www.pharmalot.com/http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/11/pharma-and-its-influence-on-the-media/#more-17951