Drug Advertising, Continuing Medical Education, and Physician Prescribing: A Historical Review and Reform Proposal

Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 38 (4):807-815 (2010)

Abstract

Through the 1960s, many people claimed that drug advertising was educational and physicians often relied on it. Continuing Medical Education (CME) was developed to provide an alternative. However, because CME relied on grants, industry funders chose the subjects offered. Now policymakers worry that drug firms support CME to promote sales and that commercial support biases prescribing and fosters inappropriate drug use. A historical review reveals parallel problems between advertising and industry-funded CME. To preclude industry influence and improve CME, we should ensure independent funding by taxing medical industries, facilities and physicians. Independent public and professional authorities should create CME curricula. An independent agency should allocate all funds to educational institutions for approved curricula

Download options

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 72,805

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-11-25

Downloads
35 (#329,895)

6 months
1 (#386,031)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

References found in this work

Professional Societies and Industry Support: What Is the Quid Pro Quo?Jerome P. Kassirer - 2007 - Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 50 (1):7-17.
Physicians' Conflicts of Interest.Marc A. Rodwin - 1994 - Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 37 (2):308.

Add more references

Similar books and articles