scholarly journals A hidden web of policy influence: The pharmaceutical industry’s engagement with UK’s All-Party Parliamentary Groups

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (6) ◽  
pp. e0252551
Author(s):  
Emily Rickard ◽  
Piotr Ozieranski
Keyword(s):  
Pharmaceutical Industry ◽  
Conflicts Of Interest ◽  
Pharmaceutical Companies ◽  
Total Drug ◽  
Conflicts Of Interests ◽  
Policy Influence ◽  
Patient Organisations ◽  
Drug Companies ◽  
Health Related ◽  
Industry Needs

Our objective was to examine conflicts of interest between the UK’s health-focused All-Party Parliamentary Groups (APPGs) and the pharmaceutical industry between 2012 and 2018. APPGs are informal cross-party groups revolving around a particular topic run by and for Members of the UK’s Houses of Commons and Lords. They facilitate engagement between parliamentarians and external organisations, disseminate knowledge, and generate debate through meetings, publications, and events. We identified APPGs focusing on physical or mental health, wellbeing, health care, or treatment and extracted details of their payments from external donors disclosed on the Register for All-Party Parliamentary Groups. We identified all donors which were pharmaceutical companies and pharmaceutical industry-funded patient organisations. We established that sixteen of 146 (11%) health-related APPGs had conflicts of interest indicated by reporting payments from thirty-five pharmaceutical companies worth £1,211,345.81 (16.6% of the £7,283,414.90 received by all health-related APPGs). Two APPGs (Health and Cancer) received more than half of the total value provided by drug companies. Fifty APPGs also had received payments from patient organisations with conflicts of interest, indicated by reporting 304 payments worth £986,054.94 from 57 (of 84) patient organisations which had received £27,883,556.3 from pharmaceutical companies across the same period. In total, drug companies and drug industry-funded patient organisations provided a combined total of £2,197,400.75 (30.2% of all funding received by health-related APPGs) and 468 (of 1,177–39.7%) payments to 58 (of 146–39.7%) health-related APPGs, with the APPG for Cancer receiving the most funding. In conclusion, we found evidence of conflicts of interests through APPGs receiving substantial income from pharmaceutical companies. Policy influence exerted by the pharmaceutical industry needs to be examined holistically, with an emphasis on relationships between actors potentially playing part in its lobbying campaigns. We also suggest ways of improving transparency of payment reporting by APPGs and pharmaceutical companies.

scholarly journals Conflicts of Interest in International Human Drug Research and the Insufficiency of International Protections

2006 ◽  
Vol 32 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 351-364 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Gatter
Keyword(s):  
Drug Research ◽  
Conflicts Of Interest ◽  
Human Subjects ◽  
Private Investment ◽  
Pharmaceutical Products ◽  
Pharmaceutical Companies ◽  
Human Subjects Research ◽  
Drug Companies ◽  
The World ◽  
Financial Conflicts Of Interest

The world relies largely on private firms for the development of new medicine, and the system is efficient. Driven by the incentive to profit from sales of new pharmaceuticals, drug companies risk millions of dollars and years of work to shepherd basic scientific discoveries through laboratory and human testing in the hope of developing a marketable drug. For example, it is estimated that in 2002 alone, pharmaceutical companies invested $45 billion the development of new medicine worldwide.While the profit incentive generates such enormous private investment in human drug development, it also encourages firms to pose inappropriate risks to the safety of human subjects when speeding a new drug to the market. The risks posed by financial conflicts of interest associated with human subjects research on new pharmaceutical products are notable examples, both in the U.S. and internationally.

scholarly journals Advertising Policies of Medical Journals: Conflicts of Interest for Journal Editors and Professional Societies

1999 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 113-121 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Orentlicher ◽  
Michael K. Hehir
Keyword(s):  
Conflicts Of Interest ◽  
Medical Profession ◽  
Pharmaceutical Companies ◽  
Critical Area ◽  
Medical Journals ◽  
The Public ◽  
Journal Editors ◽  
Professional Societies ◽  
Commercial Enterprise ◽  
Health Related

As the medical profession becomes more and more of a commercial enterprise, commentators are subjecting conflicts of interest in medicine to increasing scrutiny. However, one critical area of conflict has largely escaped discussion—the conflicts of interest raised by the advertising policies of medical journals. Moreover, when these conflicts are discussed, they are examined almost exclusively in terms of the concerns that they pose for journal editors. Yet, there is a second critical concern with journal advertising policies. The policies also create serious conflicts of interest for the professional societies that own medical journals.In this article, we will discuss the conflicts of interest that are raised for journal editors and professional societies by journal advertising policies, and we will conclude that the policies are exactly backward. Currently, medical journals rely on advertisements from pharmaceutical companies and other health-related businesses and avoid—indeed exclude—advertisements from consumer-oriented companies, like producers of automobiles, golf equipment, or jewelry. We submit that the medical journals, the medical profession, and the public would be better served if consumeroriented advertisement were preferred over health-related advertising.

Psychiatry and the pharmaceutical industry

2021 ◽  
pp. 183-208
Author(s):  
Stephen A. Green
Keyword(s):  
Pharmaceutical Industry ◽  
Conflicts Of Interest ◽  
Professional Organizations ◽  
Ethical Standards ◽  
Educational Activities ◽  
Drug Companies ◽  
The Government ◽  
Collaborative Activities ◽  
Psychiatric Profession ◽  
The Relationship

Conflicts of interest pervade the relationship between the psychiatric profession and pharmaceutical industry, threatening ethical standards of psychiatric care. They influence the quality and cost of treatment, the objectivity of research and educational activities, and the integrity of individual psychiatrists, as well as the profession in general. Various groups, apart from drug companies, bear responsibility for the prevalence of conflicts of interest, including individual practitioners and researchers, medical academe, professional organizations both within and external to psychiatry, and branches of the government. Reforming practices and policies that encourage such conflicts can only be contained by efforts aimed at educating the profession and public as to the relevant issues, as well as enlisting governmental action, in order to hold industry and the profession more accountable for potentially unethical collaborative activities.

scholarly journals Is academic psychiatry for sale?

2003 ◽  
Vol 182 (5) ◽  
pp. 388-390 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Healy ◽  
Michael E. Thase
Keyword(s):  
Academic Psychiatry ◽  
Pharmaceutical Industry ◽  
Conflicts Of Interest ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Psychiatric Service ◽  
University Of Pittsburgh ◽  
The North ◽  
Drug Companies ◽  
The One ◽  
The Relationship

The influence of the pharmaceutical industry on academic medicine is pervasive. Almost 90% of authors published in the Journal of the American Medical Associatio. have received research funding from, or acted as a consultant for, a drug company. Rising to this challenge, editors of medical journals have agreed strict rules on reporting sponsorship and conflicts of interest. Academic psychiatry is not exempt from the influence of industry. The relationship between drug companies and academic psychiatry is currently very close. But is this a problem? On the one hand, links with the pharmaceutical industry may be considered to compromise the independence of researchers and possibly discredit their published work. On the other hand the relationship may be seen as productive and mutually beneficial – particularly in an era of limited funds for research. These issues are discussed in this month's debate by Dr David Healy, Director of the North Wales Psychiatric Service, who is a well-known commentator on the pharmaceutical industry, and Dr Michael Thase, Professor of Psychiatry at the University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine and the author of a meta-analysis on the effectiveness of venlafaxine published in this Journal in 2001.

scholarly journals Under-reported relationship: a comparative study of pharmaceutical industry and patient organisation payment disclosures in the UK (2012–2016)

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (9) ◽  
pp. e037351 ◽  
Author(s):  
Piotr Ozieranski ◽  
Marcell Csanádi ◽  
Emily Rickard ◽  
Shai Mulinari
Keyword(s):  
Conflicts Of Interest ◽  
Descriptive Analysis ◽  
Patient Organisation ◽  
Entire Study Period ◽  
Industry Data ◽  
Industry Funding ◽  
Entire Study ◽  
Patient Organisations ◽  
Drug Companies ◽  
The Uk

ObjectivesTo examine the under-reporting of pharmaceutical company payments to patient organisations by donors and recipients.DesignComparative descriptive analysis of payments disclosed on drug company and charity regulator websites.SettingUK.Participants87 donors (drug companies) and 425 recipients (patient organisations) reporting payments in 2012–2016.Main outcome measuresNumber and value of payments reported by donors and recipients; differences in reported payments from/to the same donors and recipients; payments reported in either dataset but not the other one; agreement between donor–recipient ties established by payments; overlap between donor and recipient lists and, respectively, industry and patient organisation data.ResultsOf 87 donors, 63 (72.4%) reported payments but 84 (96.6%) were mentioned by recipients. Although donors listed 425 recipients, only 200 (47.1%) reported payments. The number and value of payments reported by donors were 259.8% and 163.7% greater than those reported by recipients, respectively. The number of donors with matching payment numbers and values in both datasets were 3.4% and 0.0%, respectively; for recipients these figures were 7.8% and 1.9%. There were 24 and 3 donors missing from industry and patient organisation data during the entire study period, representing 38.1% and 3.6% of those in the respective datasets. The share of donor–recipient ties in which industry and patient organisation data agreed about donors and recipients was 38.9% and 68.4% in each dataset, respectively. Of 63 donors reporting payments, only 3 (4.8%) had their recipient lists fully overlapping with patient organisation data. Of 200 recipients reporting industry funding, 102 (51.0%) had their donor lists fully overlapping with industry data.ConclusionsBoth donors and recipients under-reported payments. Existing donor and recipient disclosure systems cannot manage potential conflicts of interest associated with industry payments. Increased standardisation could limit the under-reporting by each side but only an integrated donor–recipient database could eliminate it.

From Bad Pharma to Good Pharma: Aligning Market Forces with Good and Trustworthy Practices through Accreditation, Certification, and Rating

2013 ◽  
Vol 41 (3) ◽  
pp. 601-610 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer E. Miller
Keyword(s):  
Pharmaceutical Industry ◽  
Best Practices ◽  
Credit Rating ◽  
Revolving Door ◽  
Rating System ◽  
Pharmaceutical Companies ◽  
Market Forces ◽  
Conflicts Of Interests ◽  
Rating Agencies

Could an accreditation, certification, or rating mechanism help the pharmaceutical industry improve both its bioethical performance and its public reputation? Other industries have used such systems to assess, improve, distinguish, and demonstrate the quality of their services, processes, and products. These systems have also helped increase transparency, accountability, stakeholder confidence, and awareness of industry best practices. This article explains how market forces can be harnessed to recognize and promote better bioethical performance by pharmaceutical companies when there are good systems to accredit, certify, or rate. It concludes with a review of relevant failures of credit-rating agencies — such as conflicts of interests and revolving-door practices — to illuminate some of the pitfalls of developing a bioethics accreditation, certification, or rating system for pharmaceutical companies.

scholarly journals Epistemic Corruption, the Pharmaceutical Industry, and the Body of Medical Science

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sergio Sismondo
Keyword(s):  
Pharmaceutical Industry ◽  
Conflicts Of Interest ◽  
Medical Science ◽  
Knowledge System ◽  
The Body ◽  
Medical Community ◽  
Pharmaceutical Companies ◽  
Abundant Evidence

When a knowledge system importantly loses integrity, ceasing to provide the kinds of trusted knowledge expected of it, we can label this epistemic corruption. Epistemic corruption often occurs because the system has been co-opted for interests at odds with some of the central goals thought to lie behind it. There is now abundant evidence that the involvement of pharmaceutical companies corrupts medical science. Within the medical community, this is generally assumed to be the result of conflicts of interest. However, some important ways that the industry corrupts are not captured well by standard analyses in terms of conflicts of interest. It is not just that there is a body of medical science perverted by industry largesse. Instead, much of the corruption of medical science via the pharmaceutical industry happens through grafting activities: Pharmaceutical companies do their own research and smoothly integrate it with medical science, taking advantage of the legitimacy of the latter.

Chiral imidazolidinones: A class of priviliged organocatalysts in stereoselective organic synthesis

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (5) ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura Raimondi ◽  
Chiara Faverio ◽  
Monica Fiorenza Boselli
Keyword(s):  
Pharmaceutical Industry ◽  
Green Chemistry ◽  
Organic Synthesis ◽  
Catalytic Synthesis ◽  
Biological Chemistry ◽  
Chiral Molecules ◽  
Catalytic Systems ◽  
Drug Synthesis ◽  
Industry Needs

AbstractChiral molecules hold a mail position in Organic and Biological Chemistry, so pharmaceutical industry needs suitable strategies for drug synthesis. Moreover, Green Chemistry procedures are increasingly required in order to avoid environment deterioration. Catalytic synthesis, in particular organocatalysis, in thus a continuously expanding field. A survey of more recent researches involving chiral imidazolidinones is here presented, with a particular focus on immobilized catalytic systems.

AIDS Drugs & the Pharmaceutical Industry: A Need For Reform

1991 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 363-410
Author(s):  
Mary T. Griffin
Keyword(s):  
Pharmaceutical Industry ◽  
Research And Development ◽  
Drug Approval ◽  
Hiv And Aids ◽  
Price Regulation ◽  
Drug Industry ◽  
Drug Companies ◽  
Aids Drugs

AbstractThe pharmaceutical industry has long enjoyed substantial profits despite increased requirements for drug approval and various attempts to regulate the industry. Drug companies have avoided effective regulation by blaming high prices on the costs of research and development. The search for drugs effective in combatting HIV and AIDS related illnesses has provided a stark background on which to view the actions and justifications of drug companies. Despite increased cooperation between government and the drug industry and expedited approval of several useful drugs, these drugs are still prohibitively expensive. This Article explores the history and economics of the drug industry and proposes a system of national price regulation for all drugs.

Pharmaceutical industry sponsorship of academic conferences: ethics of conflict of interest

2020 ◽  
pp. medethics-2020-106224
Author(s):  
Saroj Jayasinghe
Keyword(s):  
Developing Countries ◽  
Pharmaceutical Industry ◽  
Ethical Issues ◽  
Social Trust ◽  
Medical Profession ◽  
Codes Of Conduct ◽  
Developed Countries ◽  
Professional Judgment ◽  
Conflicts Of Interests ◽  
Core Issue

Sponsorship of medical conferences by the pharmaceutical industry has led to many ethical issues, especially in resource-poor developing countries. The core issue in these instances is to reduce or avoid conflicts of interests (COIs). COI is a set of circumstances that creates a risk that professional judgment or actions regarding a primary interest will be unduly influenced by secondary interests. Disruption of social trust should also be considered. This deontological approach should be complemented by a consequentialist approach. Towards this, the concept of distal interests (DI) is introduced. DI lies beyond the immediately visible COIs and the consequences of immediate decisions. They are ‘distal’ in time or place: ‘DI in time’ means consequence of the decision in future scenarios, while ‘DI in space’ means those that impinge on other institutions or bodies. In judging the consequences, it is also necessary to consider the reality of the existing relationship between the pharmaceutical industry and organisers of conferences. In more developed countries, these relationships are governed by stricter regulations, adherence to codes of conduct by both parties and stronger institutional oversights. In contrast, developing countries such as Sri Lanka the regulatory environment is lax and the demarcation of interests between the pharmaceutical industry and the medical profession is considerably blurred. Therefore, establishing clear rules of engagement between the stakeholders should be considered as an attempt to clear the muddy waters. The paper proposes a set of guidelines to capture these approaches.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document