Re: Guidance offers little in the way of ethics or transparency
Moving toward greater transparency in the life sciences sector
Following on from the recent publication of the Guidance on collaboration between healthcare professionals and the pharmaceutical industry, the BMJ received two letters of criticism to which we would like to respond (BMJ 2012;344:e2910 and BMJ 2012;344:e2927). The guidance on collaboration is just the first step in a series of work by the Ethical Standards in Health and Life Sciences Group (ESHLSG) that is seeking to address issues in the relationship between industry and healthcare professionals. Over the coming months the life sciences sector and wider healthcare community will be developing a number of initiatives addressing industry’s support of medical education, clinical trial transparency, and the declaration of payments to healthcare professionals.
It is unfortunate that the Guidance document has been misinterpreted by readers. The purpose of the document is not to answer every question and reject every concern: we understand that the industry’s support of medical education is a contentious issue, and we are working together to address this, just as we are also jointly looking at clinical trial data transparency concerns. This document is one stage in the process of improving transparency across the Life Sciences Sector – it may not be the definitive step, but it is an important one.
The intent of the ESHLSG is to ensure that relationships between health professionals and the industry are open, transparent, and aligned to patient benefit. Transparency, better understanding, and the sharing of expertise between the professions and industry can only serve to improve clinical care and the education of all involved, especially as collaborative working is becoming an increasingly important way for the NHS to address key health challenges in a constrained budgetary environment.
Both the NHS and pharmaceutical industry want to improve patient care and clinical outcomes through high quality, cost effective treatment – by pooling our expertise and resources we are able to together tackle disease more effectively. Surely that is a positive thing?
Sir Richard Thompson
President of the Royal College of Physicians
Deepak Khanna
President of the Association of British Pharmaceutical Industry
Competing interests:
No competing interests
04 May 2012
Richard Thompson
Co-chair, Ethical Standards in Health and Life Sciences Group
Deepak Khanna, Co-chair, Ethical Standards in Health and Life Sciences Group, President of the Association of British Pharmaceutical Industry
President of the Royal College of Physicians
Royal College of Physicians, 11 St Andrew's Place, Regent's Park, London, NW1 4LE
Rapid Response:
Re: Guidance offers little in the way of ethics or transparency
Moving toward greater transparency in the life sciences sector
Following on from the recent publication of the Guidance on collaboration between healthcare professionals and the pharmaceutical industry, the BMJ received two letters of criticism to which we would like to respond (BMJ 2012;344:e2910 and BMJ 2012;344:e2927). The guidance on collaboration is just the first step in a series of work by the Ethical Standards in Health and Life Sciences Group (ESHLSG) that is seeking to address issues in the relationship between industry and healthcare professionals. Over the coming months the life sciences sector and wider healthcare community will be developing a number of initiatives addressing industry’s support of medical education, clinical trial transparency, and the declaration of payments to healthcare professionals.
It is unfortunate that the Guidance document has been misinterpreted by readers. The purpose of the document is not to answer every question and reject every concern: we understand that the industry’s support of medical education is a contentious issue, and we are working together to address this, just as we are also jointly looking at clinical trial data transparency concerns. This document is one stage in the process of improving transparency across the Life Sciences Sector – it may not be the definitive step, but it is an important one.
The intent of the ESHLSG is to ensure that relationships between health professionals and the industry are open, transparent, and aligned to patient benefit. Transparency, better understanding, and the sharing of expertise between the professions and industry can only serve to improve clinical care and the education of all involved, especially as collaborative working is becoming an increasingly important way for the NHS to address key health challenges in a constrained budgetary environment.
Both the NHS and pharmaceutical industry want to improve patient care and clinical outcomes through high quality, cost effective treatment – by pooling our expertise and resources we are able to together tackle disease more effectively. Surely that is a positive thing?
Sir Richard Thompson
President of the Royal College of Physicians
Deepak Khanna
President of the Association of British Pharmaceutical Industry
Competing interests: No competing interests