corner
Healthy Skepticism
Join us to help reduce harm from misleading health information.
Increase font size   Decrease font size   Print-friendly view   Print
Register Log in

Healthy Skepticism Library item: 13620

Warning: This library includes all items relevant to health product marketing that we are aware of regardless of quality. Often we do not agree with all or part of the contents.

 

Publication type: Journal Article

Montgomery BD.
Free lunches are not the answer
BMJ 2008 May 10; 336:(7652):1034
http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/336/7652/1034-b?ijkey=XMbLfmtZum7YhNt&keytype=ref


Full text:

I share Dr Patel’s concerns about doctors’ continuing education and the quality of hospital food.1 However, I disagree that “free” lunches are the best solution to either of these problems.

No clinician can be expected to follow the progress of experimental drugs in hundreds of journals. That is why we have independent sources of information about drugs-such as the Drug and Therapeutics Bulletin, NPS Radar, and Prescrire International-which aim to distil a complex evidence base into accessible guidance for busy clinicians. Prescrire International published a review of ivabradine last year, which deemed it “best avoided.“2 According to the abstract, concerns include a lack of evidence of superiority to standard antianginal drugs and evidence of increased adverse cardiac events in patients taking ivabradine compared with those taking atenolol or amlodipine.2 Did Dr Patel hear these messages from his smiling drug representative? I found this information via a PubMed search in about the time it would have taken Dr Patel to eat his lunch.

Contact with drug representatives is positively associated with prescribing new drugs, prescribing costs, and non-rational prescribing.3 Industry paid meals are associated with formulary addition requests.3 New drugs are not necessarily safe; how many patients may have been harmed by free lunches promoting rofecoxib? And “free” lunches are not really free-they are paid for by drug sales. It would be wise to improve investment in doctors’ prescribing education, but let’s not deceive ourselves that free lunches are a substitute for this.

Brett D Montgomery, clinical senior lecturer

1 Discipline of General Practice, School of Primary, Aboriginal and Rural Health Care (SPARHC) University of Western Australia, Crawley, WA 6009, Australia

brett@multiline.com.au

————————————————————————————————————————
Competing interests: BDM is a member of Healthy Skepticism, an organisation that aims to reduce harm from inappropriate drug promotion.

References

Patel K. Why I love a free lunch. BMJ 2008;336:962-a. (26 April.) doi: 10.1136/bmj.39556.557234.94.[Free Full Text]
Anonymous. Ivabradine: new drug. Best avoided in stable angina. Prescrire Int 2007;16:53-6.[Medline]
Wazana A. Physicians and the pharmaceutical industry: is a gift ever just a gift? JAMA 2000;283:373-80.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

 

  Healthy Skepticism on RSS   Healthy Skepticism on Facebook   Healthy Skepticism on Twitter

Please
Click to Register

(read more)

then
Click to Log in
for free access to more features of this website.

Forgot your username or password?

You are invited to
apply for membership
of Healthy Skepticism,
if you support our aims.

Pay a subscription

Support our work with a donation

Buy Healthy Skepticism T Shirts


If there is something you don't like, please tell us. If you like our work, please tell others.

Email a Friend








Far too large a section of the treatment of disease is to-day controlled by the big manufacturing pharmacists, who have enslaved us in a plausible pseudo-science...
The blind faith which some men have in medicines illustrates too often the greatest of all human capacities - the capacity for self deception...
Some one will say, Is this all your science has to tell us? Is this the outcome of decades of good clinical work, of patient study of the disease, of anxious trial in such good faith of so many drugs? Give us back the childlike trust of the fathers in antimony and in the lancet rather than this cold nihilism. Not at all! Let us accept the truth, however unpleasant it may be, and with the death rate staring us in the face, let us not be deceived with vain fancies...
we need a stern, iconoclastic spirit which leads, not to nihilism, but to an active skepticism - not the passive skepticism, born of despair, but the active skepticism born of a knowledge that recognizes its limitations and knows full well that only in this attitude of mind can true progress be made.
- William Osler 1909