Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
BMJ 2004;328:46 (3 January), doi:10.1136/bmj.328.7430.46
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
EDITORClark and Smith's focus on internal and external funding and leadership is paramount in improving the state of academic medicine.1
Academic health care has deteriorated because academicians are poorly remunerated (compared with their peers) for their academic work, unless they partner with industry. Unfortunately, industry's raison d'être seems to be the promotion of therapeutics or diagnostics rather than of education for education's sake. Thus all education partnered with industry is potentially tainted by the underlying profit motive.
Additionally, research productivity is important for much of the academic advancement in faculties of medicine and health science. Because there has been a disinvestment from clinical research by government organisations, researchers who wish to proceed through the ranks via research must increasingly rely on industry funds to support their work. Again, all such work is potentially tainted by the profit motive.
Yet the researchers who are able to forge the ties
Andrew M Morris, assistant professor, infectious diseases and internal medicine
McMaster University, Hamilton General Hospital, 237 Barton Street East, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada L8L 2X2 morriand@hhsc.ca