Britten willen invloed farmaceuten beteugelen

Niet minder dan een ‘fundamentele aanpak’ is nodig om de invloed van de farmaceuten op politiek en samenleving terug te brengen. Dat is de conclusie van een Britse parlementaire commissie die deze invloed heeft onderzocht.

De elf leden sterke commissie heeft op eigen initiatief de farmaceutische invloed onderzocht omdat “het publiek zich steeds meer bewust wordt van de excessieve invloed van die industrie” en omdat aan de “medicalisatie van de samenleving” een halt moet worden geroepen.

The committee’s report makes clear that reducing the influence of the industry would be good for everybody, including—paradoxically—the industry itself, which could concentrate on developing new drugs rather than on corrupting doctors, patient organisations, and others. “It is not in the long term interests of the industry for prescribers and the public to lose faith in it,” says the report. “We need an industry which is led by the values of its scientists not those of its marketing force.”

The committee came up with 48 conclusions and recommendations, and I have listed some of the highlights in Box 2. The committee’s main recommendation for the problems it identifies is transparency: “let the sun shine in.” It begins by recommending that there be a clinical trials register, “maintained by an independent body” and containing full information. Companies should be required to put the information on the register “at launch as a condition of the marketing licence.” The committee also wants regulatory authorities and ethics committees (the British equivalent of institutional review boards) to help with the design of trials to make sure that they are answering real questions. It didn’t, however, recommend more public funding of trials. I believe that such funding is necessary in order to ensure that trials are addressing the most important questions—including head-to-head comparisons and trials of new drugs against older drugs and non-drug treatments. Advice to companies is unlikely to be effective.

There should be, says the committee, limits on the quantity of marketing materials, particularly in the first six months after launch, and stricter controls on marketing to junior doctors, nurses, and pharmacists. These proposals don’t seem sufficiently thought through: it’s hard to imagine how the proposals would be enforced, and they are patronising to junior doctors, nurses, and pharmacists—many of whom are much better, I suspect, at assessing evidence than burnt out, ageing, high-prescribing general practitioners.

Doctors might come to be seen as the villains rather than the good guys.

Curbing the Influence of the Drug Industry: A British View

Box 2. Recommendations from the Health Committee Enquiry: Some Highlights

  • The process of licensing drugs, and the medicines’ regulatory system, should both be more transparent.

  • There should be an independent register of clinical trials.

  • Clinical trials should focus on using health outcomes that are relevant to patients.

  • More research should be undertaken into the adverse effects of drugs and the costs of drug-induced illness.

  • The regulator should ensure greater restraint in medicines’ promotion.

  • Tougher restriction should be placed on the prescribing activities of non-specialists.

  • Doctors should be required to declare significant sums or gifts they receive as hospitality.

  • The sponsorship of the drug industry should pass from the Department of Health to the Department of Trade and Industry—because the secretary of state for health cannot serve two masters (the public and the industry).

  • (Information taken from [1])


Geef een reactie

Het e-mailadres wordt niet gepubliceerd. Vereiste velden zijn gemarkeerd met *

Download poster


  • "Es ist schwieriger, eine vorgefaßte Meinung zu zertrümmern als ein Atom."
    (Het is moeilijker een vooroordeel aan flarden te schieten dan een atoom.)
    Albert Einstein

  • "Als je alles zou laten dat slecht is voor je gezondheid, dan ging je kapot"
    Anonieme arts

  • "The effects of other people smoking in my presence is so small it doesn't worry me."
    Sir Richard Doll, 2001

  • "Een leugen wordt de waarheid als hij maar vaak genoeg wordt herhaald"
    Joseph Goebbels, Minister van Propaganda, Nazi Duitsland

  • "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win."
    Mahatma Gandhi

  • "There''s no such thing as perfect air. If there was, God wouldn''t have put bristles in our noses"
    Coun. Bill Clement

  • "Better a smoking freedom than a non-smoking tyranny"
    Antonio Martino, Italiaanse Minister van Defensie

  • "If smoking cigars is not permitted in heaven, I won't go."
    Mark Twain

  • I've alllllllways said that asking smokers "do you want to quit?" and reporting the results of that question, as is, is horribly misleading. It's a TWO part question. After asking if one wants to quit it must be followed up with "Why?" Ask why and the majority of the answers will be "because I'm supposed to" (victims of guilt and propaganda), not "because I want to."
    Audrey Silk, NYCCLASH