An important consideration that has only increased since this paper was published. To read the discussion, click the link below.
This discussion paper explores these debates from the critical perspective of a women’s health advocacy group that does not accept pharmaceutical company funds. :
“Throughout the health sector, pharmaceutical companies are now an important source of funding. As part of their marketing strategies, drug companies provide grants and other support to patient groups and disease-specific organizations. As a result, many groups receive funds from the same companies that are directly affected by policy questions central to their advocacy. Organizations receive tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars annually, sometimes more, from the drug industry for projects such as conferences, publications, web sites, and advocacy training.5 This trend is occurring at the same time that health researchers, peer-reviewed medical journals, physicians’ professional associations, bioethicists and whistleblowers within drug regulatory agencies are raising red flags over conflicts of interest arising from pharmaceutical company funding in their respective communities. The focus of the present discussion is Canada, but the same phenomenon has attracted attention in the US, Europe, Australia and New Zealand.6
Some women’s health groups still play a watchdog role towards both industry and government. These groups have raised alarms about the ties between the pharmaceutical industry and health advocacy groups. The dominant model in Canada, as elsewhere, however, is the professionalized health advocacy group with industry partnerships. These groups rarely criticize industry practices. Since drugs harmful to women’s health continue to make headlines (some recent examples are HRT, Diane 35 and Accutane), the weakened influence of non-profit groups that speak out on health protection issues is a threat to women’s health. “
For more:
