E-DRUG: WHO's web-based public hearings: hijacked by pharma? (2)
--------------------------------------------------------------
[A search of the e-drug archives for industry funded patient groups will lead to earlier discussions related to this issue. BS]
Dear E-druggers:
The Lancet letter from our Thai colleagues poses a troubling question. What
are we to make of patient advocacy groups that are funded, more or less, by
drug firms?
One suspects, when these groups take positions supportive of corporate
interests, is that they are incredible given that they're in the pay of
corporations. In the States, these groups are called Astroturf, a brand of fake grass
-- as opposed to real "grassroots" opinion. Astroturf often passes for the
real thing, and bad policy may result -- how else to explain America's
inability to stem its plague of handgun violence?
In candor, corporations back synthetic patient advocacy groups because they
fear they have little credibility under their own names. The devilish thing
is, patient interests often coincide with, rather than conflict with,
corporate needs. For the life of me I cannot understand why companies so rarely
speak openly, particularly when their views are consonant with the public
interest. Instead, too often, they act as though Cyrano de Bergerac were a
documentary. .
The challenge to find and deliver weapons of value at the bedside is
monumental. The rest is simply quibbling.
Jim
James B. Russo
146 Koenig Rd.
Bernville, PA 19506
USA
jbrusso@aol.com
610 488 9060
484 269 7490 (mobile)
510 488 7036 (fax)