Pharmaceutical Industry Disclosure Practices

Pharmaceutical Industry Support for Patient Groups/
Promotion of Prescription Drugs

Philadelphia Inquirer: Donations tie drug firms and nonprofits: Many patient groups reveal few, if any, details on relationships with pharmaceutical donors
by Thomas Ginsberg (May 28, 2006)

An investigation into six patient groups, each a leading advocate for patients in a disease area, revealed that all receive significant amounts of money from drug companies, and few disclose such ties when commenting about or lobbying about donor's drugs. This practice raises questions about the impartiality of groups that patients rely on when making medical decisions but which raise money from an industry whose profit motives may conflict with the best interests of patients.

Boston Globe: Doctors Fights Over Drug Firm Influence
by Christopher Rowland (June 16, 2005)

The cofounder of the American Society of Hypertension has started a fierce, behind-the-scenes battle over how much influence drug companies exert on the group's activities. The episode is a stark example of a broader debate about such conflicts-of-interest that is taking place within the nation's medical societies, which represent physicians in nearly every medical specialty.

Wall Street Journal: Pharmaceutical Companies Help Defray Drug Costs; Manufacturer-Supported Charities
Geeta Anand (December 2, 2005)

Drug companies have increasingly been giving money to charities set up to help insured patients afford the high premiums and co-payments for drugs. Critics say this is a short term fix that doesn't address the underlying problem: the soaring cost of ultra-expensive drugs, the cost of which are being shifted to patients' insurers who are in turn spreading the costs onto the other people they cover.

Sacramento Bee: A little too cozy?; Not-for-profits may have undisclosed funding ties to for-profit drug companies
Dorsey Griffith and Steve Wiegand (July 13, 2005)

The relationships between the makers of a new sleeping pill, a non-profit group that released a widely-reported poll showing widespread sleeping problems amongst Americans, and the public relations firm that contacted reporters about both the poll and the new sleeping pill is but one example of the relationships many not-for-profit health advocacy groups have with the for-profit health industry. Leaders of these advocacy groups concede that their groups couldn't survive without corporate sponsors.

Seattle Times: Disease expands through marriage of marketing and machines; Suddenly sick - The hidden big business behind your doctors diagnosis: Case study: Osteoporosis
(June 28, 2005)

New bone density standards, the proliferation of density-testing machines and an active ad campaign have a dramatic result: Many middle-age women are being treated for a disease they're unlikely to get. Drug and device-makers pushed for these changes in the name of prevention, but one of the world's leading experts on osteoporosis says the companies' push has been driven by profits as well as medicine.

Seattle Times: Rush toward new drugs tramples patients' health; Suddenly sick: The hidden big business behind your doctor's diagnosis: Case study: Obesity
by Susan Kelleher (June 27, 2005)

Many of the world' obesity experts pushed to have the condition defined a disease, helping create a billion dollar market for an obesity drug that killed hundreds and damaged the hearts and lungs of tens of thousands. This story shows how it has become acceptable for doctors to risk killing or injuring people on the premise that it would save them from illnesses they might never get.

New York Times: Drug Makers Scrutinized Over Grants
by Gardiner Harris (January 11, 2006)

A U.S. Congressional investigation of the money that drug companies give as supposed educational grants has found that the payments are growing rapidly and are sometimes steered by marketing executives to doctors and groups who push unapproved uses of drugs. The investigation is part of a growing reassessment by federal legislators and prosecutors of the ways that drug makers are said to encourage doctors to prescribe medicines for uses not approved by federal drug regulators.

Newsday (New York): A dose of controversy; The relationship between drug companies and advocacy groups looms over FDA process
by Kathleen Kerr (April 26, 2007)

Every year, drug companies give millions of dollars to various organizations, some of which voice public support for their products. That practice adds another layer to a stack of concerns about potential conflicts posed by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) drug approval process.

Boston Globe: Drug firms' funding of advocates often escapes government scrutiny Many patient groups depend on it, raising tricky ethical questions
by Diedtra Henderson (March 18, 2007)

USA Today: Drugmakers go furthest to sway Congress
by Jim Drinkard (April 26, 2005)

The pharmaceutical industry is very influential on Capitol Hill. It spends more money on lobbying lawmakers than any other industry and channels vast amounts of money into other sorts of activities that more indirectly influence both legislative activity and public opinion on issues important to the industry's financial interests.

Washington Post: Nonprofit Health Advocacy Groups Like to Portray Themselves as Patients' Allies. Can They Serve Corporate Benefactors at the Same Time?
by Tinker Ready (February 7, 2006)

Many health advocacy groups provide information about new treatments but do not provide patients with information about how to assess drug safety. Questions have been raised about whether this practice has been influenced by the fact that drug companies provide funding to these groups, and whether they are really able to serve patient interests as a result.

Seattle Times: Clash over "little blue pill" for women; Suddenly Sick - The hidden big business behind your doctor's diagnosis - Case study: Female sexual dysfunction
by Susan Kelleher (June 30, 2005)

Female sexual dysfunction (FSD) is a case study in how researchers financed by pharmaceutical companies can try to turn problems into an expanded disease, creating a market for drugs, even when those problems are not well understood. The case of FSD also demonstrates how some medical professionals are pushing back, challenging those who define disease to back up those definitions with hard scientific evidence.

Bismarck Tribune: Group rallies against drug plan Senator claims group is front for pharmaceutical companies
by Tom Rafferty (May 6, 2005)

A nonprofit organization with ties to drug companies rallied against a plan to increase prescription drug importation on Thursday, saying a recent poll shows North Dakotans are against it. However, a spokesman for North Dakota Senator Byron Dorgan said the organization is a front for pharmaceutical companies.

Pharmaceutical Industry Disclosure Practices