Intended for healthcare professionals

Rapid response to:

News

GlaxoSmithKline faces US lawsuit over concealment of trial results

BMJ 2004; 328 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.328.7453.1395 (Published 10 June 2004) Cite this as: BMJ 2004;328:1395

Rapid Response:

Mea Culpa ...Educational Medicine et al

When will we ever learn ! Over ten years ago in a letter to the
BMJ(BMJ, May 1994; 308: 1301)I had stated that the barrage of the latest
offerings of pharmaceuticals in medical journals posed a threat to
medical practice and that another mechanism must be adopted to fund
medical journals. Should we be surprised that financial interests are the
predominant modus operandi of drug houses? Should we be wagging the finger
at drug houses and decrying their base materialism and corresponding
dishonesty and damage created? Is not the whole infrastructure of medical
education from journals to medical practice a party to this charade? Drug
research is funded by those who have the gold. While their golden calf is
not worshipped by medical practitioners, physicians are not blameless as
long as there are really no real competing alternate sources of funding
drug research. The pharmaceutical industry is expert in purveying their
truths. We must not fall prey by default. Safeguards have proven to be
weak, too late and ineffective. Litigation occurs after the fact, is not
terribly therapeutic and more often than not considered as in many multi-
national enterprises the cost of doing business. Must we wait another
decade to find solutions to this dilemma? Have we adopted the persona of
false consciousness not to recognize that we are very much part of this
problem? If not now then when?

Competing interests:
None declared

Competing interests: No competing interests

16 June 2004
Sam I Sussman
Assistant Professor Psychiatry
Physicians Canada.1532 Hillside Drive, London, Ontario, Canada, N6G4M4