Medicine is a service industry, the product of which is health care, and its practitioners deserve remuneration. But to some, the notion of medicine as a road to personal wealth is an example of free-market economics gone awry.
AMA J Ethics. 2015;17(8):780-786. doi:
10.1001/journalofethics.2015.17.8.msoc1-1508.
Bias toward allopathic medicine in the research funding and publication of study results makes it difficult for physicians and others to find accurate data about the efficacy of non-Western, nonallopathic treatments.
Industry sponsorship of continuing medical education is controversial. A standard to adhere to is that before accepting any industry-sponsored education or incentive, a physician should form an independent evaluation of the product.
Clinical trials for the blood substitute PolyHeme exposed the possibility for ambiguous interpretation of the FDA’s waiver of informed consent for emergency research.
Physicians should recognize the influence that small gift-giving has on prescribing patterns and consequently interactions between pharmaceutical representatives and medical students and residents should be limited.
A physician argues that accepting free drug samples leads to higher out-of-pocket costs for patients and urges other physicians to find different ways to help low-income patients save money on their prescription medications.
A physicians urges practitioners to use cost-effective alternatives to dispensing samples to patients who cannot afford to pay for their prescriptions.
Stanford University Medical School established a positive partnership with a pharmaceutical company to offer an industry-sponsored resident elective course in a way that minimizes conflict of interest and has been accepted by the ACGME.