Editorial
Welcome to the first homepage edition of i2P for 2012.
In many ways it has been a slow start to the New Year because of having to deal with the “leftovers” from 2011.
One of those items for i2P was that a third-party provider to the site did not advise of a code change to the security section in our subscribe panel, creating a range of frustrated subscribers not able to get on board.
We apologise to all those potential subscribers who were unable to register with us in the second half of 2011, but if you try once more you should have no problem.
Columns
Rollo Manning: Pharma-Goss
Linda Bryant: Inside NZ
Loretta Marron BSc: Health Watch
Barry Urquhart: Marketing Focus
Mark Neuenschwander: I`ve been thinking about...Recent Comments
Past Editions
Volume 1 Number 1
Volume 1 Number 2
Volume 1 Number 3
Volume 1 Number 4
Volume 1 Number 5
Volume 1 Number 6
Volume 1 Number 7
Volume 2 Number 1
Volume 2 Number 2
Volume 2 Number 3
Volume 2 Number 4
Volume 2 Number 5
Volume 2 Number 6
Volume 2 Number 7
Volume 2 Number 8
Volume 2 Number 9
Volume 2 Number 10
Volume 2 Number 11
Volume 3 Number 1
Volume 3 Number 2
Volume 3 Number 3
Volume 3 Number 4
Volume 3 Number 5
Volume 3 Number 6
Volume 3 Number 7
Volume 3 Number 8
Volume 3 Number 9
Volume 3 Number 10
Volume 3 Number 11
Volume 2012 Number 1
Health Politics
Neil Johnston: Friends of Science in Medicine
Peter Sayers: Confessions of a Frustrated Pharmacist
James Ellerson: $75.5 million in 5CPA lying idle. Why is it so?EPublications
UK Opposed to Direct to Consumer Advertising
Printer-friendly version
Send to friend
PDF version | Staff Writer |
Editing and Researching news and stories about global and local Pharmacy Issues | |
Proposals that would allow the pharmaceutical industry to provide drug information directly to consumers has been opposed by the Royal Pharmaceutical Society.
This against a EU background to develop an informational infrastructure that could be delivered to all of the European community.
A conflict of interest clearly exists between the public's interest to receive accurate and objective information and the pharmaceutical industry's objective of building revenue and market share.
Conflict of interests taints information from industry
Source: PJ Online
http://www.pjonline.com/news/confict_of_interests_taints_information_from_industry
Thu, 20/08/2009 - 14:40
Pharmaceutical companies cannot be regarded as objective sources of information given their vested financial interests, the Royal Pharmaceutical Society has said in its response to a consultation on European Commission proposals that would allow industry to provide the public with information on prescription only medicines.
The proposals are part of a move to develop a Europe-wide framework to govern provision to the public by the industry of factual, non-promotional information on medicines, to supplement information and advice currently given by health professionals.
Although in support of the EC’s overall objective, the Society says: “More work needs to be done to define what constitutes factual, non-promotional information, how it is most efficiently produced and delivered and by whom, and what standards should be the basis for quality assurance and, in due course, regulation.”
A full cost-benefits analysis for the proposed changes is also required, says the Society, to account for the potential impact on health systems of patients requesting medicines that they have become aware of through internet sites that are permitted by, and regulated according to, the proposed framework.
The Society supports proposals to maintain the current ban on direct-to-consumer advertising of POMs, and to exclude radio and television as communication channels for dissemination of the information, but criticises proposed arrangements for regulating such industry-based communications.
“We think [the proposal for co-regulation] is flawed because there should be a clear separation between the regulatory authority and the organisations it regulates,” it says, adding that the inclusion of healthcare professionals and patient representatives in the regulatory structure would be welcomed.
The Picker Institute also opposes the proposals, expressing concerns over their impact on public health.
“The Picker Institute’s position is not that the pharmaceutical industry has no role to play in providing information about medicines to patients”, it explains in its response to the consultation, but adds: “Direct-to-consumer communication by a single stakeholder group with a very substantial commercial interest is entirely inappropriate and puts undue pressure on the patient-professional consultation.”
The institute argues that there is a fundamental conflict of interest between the pharmaceutical industry’s commercial interests and patient and public needs for medicines information that is objective, is impartially presented and allows thorough comparisons between different treatment options. This conflict of interest is neither adequately addressed nor resolved by the proposals, it adds.
Return to homeResearch Reports
Dr Andrew Byrne & Associates: Tranquillizer use rife amongst OTP subjects world-wide, most legally prescribedPractice Development
Neil Retallick: Are the discounters impacting community pharmacy beyond margin erosion? | open full screen
Kay Dunkley - BPharm, Grad Dip Hosp Pharm, Grad Dip Health Admin, MPS, MSHPA: Support services for pharmacists and doctors in the United Kingdom – Part 3 Royal Medical Benevolent Fund | open full screen
Staff Writer: Catch the early wave in 2012 and secure your valuable CPD Credits at the Guild Pharmacy Academy – NSW Convention | open full screen
Information Technology
Dr David More: Australian Health Information Technology LinksIndigenous Health
Preventive Medicine
Gerald Quigley: It’s Time!If any difficulty is found in subscribing, please use the "Contact Us" panel found in the navigation bar with the message "subscribe" and your email address.
Post new comment