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: 19575

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: Electronic Source

HAI Europe
Civil Society Statement on Conflicts of Interest and the Future of Financing for WHO
HAI Europe Staff Blog 2011 May 17
http://haieuropestaffblog.blogspot.com/2011/05/conflicts-of-interest-and-future-of.html


Full text:

Statement on WHO governance and the Management of Conflicts of Interest and the Future of Financing for WHO.
We write to express our concerns about governance of the World Health Organization (WHO) and other public health bodies, as regards the management of conflicts of interest.
WHO and other public health institutions have complex relations with commercial entities that supply health care products and services. In some cases the commercial entities are subject to or in need of regulation, in order to protect consumers and promote the public interest. Public health institutions are also often engaged in buying goods and services, or providing financial assistance for such purchases.
It is therefore widely recognized that governments and public health institutions like the WHO must avoid conflicts of interest in all aspects of governance. WHO can only respond meaningfully to the challenges of public health through greater transparency and accountability guided by the priorities of Member States and the advance of public interest. However, transparency is a necessary but not sufficient safe guard: there must also be a clear approach and policy to ensure that those representing commercial interests are not part of policy and norm setting decision making.
We are concerned that proposals in the current debate over WHO reform, particularly in the report on ‘The future of financing for WHO, World Health Organization: reforms for a healthy future’, do not adequately address the management of conflicts of interest, and present an unrealistic and empirically unsupported assumption that all stakeholders will collaborate to advance the public interest.
We ask the WHO members to ensure that any changes in governance structures address in a realistic manner the risks that conflicts of interest will frustrate efforts to protect consumers and the public interest. In this regard, we emphasize also the importance of evaluating the conflicts of interest by pharmaceutical companies, vaccine manufacturers, the processed food industry, the nuclear power industry and other industries that cause environmental contamination and private donors who have complex private interests.
Specifically, we ask WHO members to guard against initiatives that will give private interests and donors a greater role in WHO governance. For this reason, we are calling on member countries to oppose the World Health Forum and the governance of the Decade of Vaccines.
Berne Declaration

GTPI/Rebrip

Health Action International (HAI)

IBFAN

Knowledge Ecology International (KEI)

Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF)

Oxfam International

People’s Health Movement (PHM)

Third World Network (TWN)

Universities Allied for Essential Medicines (UAEM)

 

  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








Cases of wilful misrepresentation are a rarity in medical advertising. For every advertisement in which nonexistent doctors are called on to testify or deliberately irrelevant references are bunched up in [fine print], you will find a hundred or more whose greatest offenses are unquestioning enthusiasm and the skill to communicate it.

The best defence the physician can muster against this kind of advertising is a healthy skepticism and a willingness, not always apparent in the past, to do his homework. He must cultivate a flair for spotting the logical loophole, the invalid clinical trial, the unreliable or meaningless testimonial, the unneeded improvement and the unlikely claim. Above all, he must develop greater resistance to the lure of the fashionable and the new.
- Pierre R. Garai (advertising executive) 1963