A Drug Connection that Blurs the Lines

A recent report compiled and released by National Public Radio alleges that many North Carolina-based physicians have also been working for major drug companies.

NPR station WFAE said drug companies employ practicing doctors to "consult" and speak at forums. While some of these physicians make only a few thousand dollars from the drug companies, others earn a hefty $100,000 a year or more.

At least one physician contacted by NPR told them that working hand-in-hand with the manufacturer of some of the drugs he prescribes allows him to be more knowledgeable about the drugs and their effects on his patients. But the report quotes a medical ethicist as saying that such dealings blur ethical lines.

There are certainly two sides to every coin. In many sporting events, competitors plug sponsoring companies and are encouraged to do so. NASCAR racers, golfers and many who engage in winter sports often depend on sponsorship money, especially early in their careers. But in other professions, even a perceived conflict of interest can be troubling.

And nowhere has that concept been more solid than in traditional journalism, which has always shunned any connection that can be perceived as a conflict of interest.

Most newsrooms quite correctly prohibit or limit gifts to staffers. The New York Times, for example, does not even allow freelancers, much less staffers, to accept what are known as "comps" (goods or services that are highly reduced in price or freebies).

So-called citizen journalists have blurred those lines. Many bloggers and independent news sites not only accept gifts and then write glowing reports about them, but also do so without attacks of conscious. It's a double standard that speaks to the quality of the end result.

And the same standards should apply to physicians. A doctor who prescribes drugs for his or her patients should not also be making money from an association with a drug manufacturer. Just as the news should be impartially reported, a prescription should be based entirely on what is in the best interests of the patient — not the doctor.

This is an ethical breach in the medical community that should not be allowed to stand.

REPRINTED FROM THE JACKSONVILLE DAILY NEWS

DISTRIBUTED BY CREATORS.COM