Corporate Funding Raises Ethical Concerns About Medical Associations

Conservative News DailyJanuary 29, 2023

Professional medical associations (PMAs)) are foundational To the U.S. Medical System, they provide medical education and practice guidelines. There are many PMAs. But the most prominent and well-known are the. American Heart Association (AHA), With Over 33,000 members, including the American Academy of Pediatrics, which has over 64,000 members and the American Medical Association, which has more than 200,000 members.

However, doctors have published opinions in medical journals that support this conclusion. Conflicts Interest (COIs), such as lack of transparency on industry money ahref=”https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6744772/”>received, These ethical issues can be challenging. Does it? Funding Starting at a Do you take drug? or device maker influence an association’s recommendation in its official guidelines? There are many reasons to be worried about this.

These conflicts of interests are unacceptable “require PMAs to maintain a high degree of academic independence and scientific integrity by avoiding inappropriate influence from commercial interests,” Write In the Journal of the American Medical Association, Dr. Steven Nissen. Dr. Nissen, Name TIME magazine listed one of the most important people in 2007 as reported by the Cleveland Jewish News. “Some physicians focus only on their medical practices, but along with actively maintaining mine, I have chosen to speak out on matters of public policy” And “to be free of conflict of interest, I never receive an honorarium from any drug company I work with.”

The British Medical Journal identifies financial conflicts of interest

Researchers write in the BMJ In 2020, the following was done: “money trail” We analyzed the records of many prominent PMAs, and discovered that their leaders received substantial drug maker support from 2017 to 2019.

“Leaders of the North American Spine Society received more than $9.5 million for general payments,” Researchers wrote. The Orthopaedic Trauma Association received more than $4.7million during that time. Michael McKee MD, president of Orthopaedic trauma Association, stated that the majority of funding was for research. Similar reasons were also given by other PMA leaders.

“Research payments linked to leaders of the American Society of Clinical Oncology were over $54 million and for those of the American College of Cardiology, almost $21 million,” The BMJ study was noted.

The researchers Obtained The U.S. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), has the financial information open. Payments System, which maintains transparent data bases mandated under the 2010 Sunshine Get involved Divulgate Financial relationships between industry, medical practitioners and teaching institutions.

“Despite their influence over key aspects of medicine, the leaders of professional medical associations have received limited scrutiny about their relationships with industry,” Write The researchers. “[I]ndustries interested in maximizing markets,” You can drive easily “overdiagnosis, overuse, and overmedicalization,” This will result in at least 20% of healthcare spending being wasted.

Is the American Heart Association’s Food Certification Program a Conflict?

The Begriff is well-known to almost everyone. 108The American Heart Association (AHA), a 125-year-old organization, and its public health messaging. However, the organization is less well-known. Paid Produced by food manufacturers to include a “heart-check” Emblem hundreds Foods that are edible “American Heart Association Certified Meets Criteria for Heart Healthy Food.”

According to AHA, food producers can pay as much as $6,000 to get their products. Annual Licenses are available for five different food products. The program raises conflict of interest and medical veracity questions.

In an a-href=”https://www.huffpost.com/entry/statins_b_1818370″>interview Barbara H. Roberts (cardiologist), author of The Truth About Statins – Risks and Alternatives for Cholesterol-Lowering Drugs. “The AHA rakes in millions from food corporations for the use of its ‘heart-check mark.’ Some of the so-called heart-healthy foods it has endorsed include Boar’s Head All Natural Ham, which contains 340 milligrams of sodium in a two-ounce serving, and Boar’s Head EverRoast Oven Roasted Chicken Breast, which contains 440 milligrams of sodium in a two-ounce serving. High sodium intake raises blood pressure, which increases the risk of cardiovascular disease. In addition, studies have shown that eating processed meat increases the risk of diabetes and atherosclerosis.”

When The Epoch Times contacted the AHA, they did not respond.

Questions about Diabetes Associations

According to its WebsiteThe Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation is funded by many corporations, including drug makers Abbott, Lilly Diabetes and Novo Nordisk. “Platinum Partners” You can contribute between $1,000,000 and $2499,999 per year. Access to Medicine Foundation calls Lilly Diabetes and Novo Nordisk two of the world’s top three insulin makers. Sanofi is the third. Insulin is essential to diabetes care.https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/why-insulin-so-expensive-diabetes-united-states-rcna39295″>prohibitively While some are more expensive than others, they can be very affordable. Ask JDFR and ADA have not been as aggressive in protesting high insulin prices on behalf patients.

The 2022 authors Story Jacobin, a U.S. political magazine, reports that they have been affected by high insulin prices. “Living with this illness is a precarious existence. As people with T1D [type 1 diabetes], we have traveled to other countries to get cheaper versions of the drug and have been forced by insurance companies to use lower-quality insulin,” They wrote. “Many people with diabetes meet in parking lots to exchange supplies or starve themselves to lower the amount of insulin they need.” Twenty-five percent of insulin-dependent diabetics “ration insulin, which can lead to complications including life-threatening diabetic ketoacidosis, blindness, amputation, and death,” wrote Annalisa Van Den Bergh and Robin Cressman.

The U.S. recent national legislation on diabetes and nonprofits was not well received by the authors.

“Major diabetes nonprofits have supported incremental measures but have remained silent on more meaningful reform,” They wrote. JDRF was and ADA were not. Both supported the insulin pricing cap in the Build Back Better bill and the House-passed Affordable Insulin Now Act which caps insulin out of pocket expenses. The measure only applies to copays, according to the Jacobin authors Write. “Copay caps tie our survival to the health care status quo because anyone is at risk of losing their insurance, allow the big three to continue to profit from $300 a vial insulin, and in our view give the false impression that the problem is being solved.”

The ADA did not respond to The Epoch Times’ request for a comment about its insulin pricing efforts but the JDRF did. The JDRF informed The Epoch Times that they have long advocated for lower insulin prices out-of-pocket for people with diabetes. “This includes our recent multi-million-dollar investment in the Civica insulin project that will provide three of the most frequently prescribed insulins for $30 per vial and $55 for a box of five pens, regardless of insurance status. We have also spent years lobbying Congress and calling on insulin manufacturers, health plans, employers, and the government to take action to lower the cost of insulin. These efforts have led to the recent $35 monthly cap on insulin costs for Medicare enrollees.”

PMA claims that less than 1% of its funding comes directly from insulin-producing companies. They also disclose the monies. Their website Website.

“These companies have no role in decisions about advocacy and research priorities. Most of our funding comes from those affected by Type 1 diabetes, who raise funds from their friends, families, and professional contacts through our Walk, Gala, Ride, and other fundraising programs,” JDRF was contacted.

The JDRF is a valid argument for corporate funders with vested interest being used in judicious ways. However, there are other concerns.

Concerns about Association Conflicts of Interest are not new

It was more than ten years ago. Besorgnization There were already concerns about how pharmaceutical funding could influence policy guidelines and clinicians. In the journal, researchers wrote. Annals Family Medicine, “there has been dramatic increase in the diagnosis and pharmaceutical management of common chronic illnesses.” They recommended following a study in Type 2 diabetes and hypertension treatment at 44 primary care clinics throughout Michigan. “limiting the influence of the pharmaceutical industry on clinical practice, toward improving the well-being of patients with chronic illness.”

An example of this apparent influence is reported The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. “In 2009, the American Geriatrics Society joined others in advocating for greater opioid use to treat chronic pain in seniors, especially those 75 and older,” It was reported. “The new guidelines recommended that over-the-counter pain relievers, such as ibuprofen and naproxen, be used rarely and that doctors instead consider prescribing opioids for all patients with moderate to severe pain,” Read the article. “The group’s guidelines are a key reference for thousands of doctors on the front line of medicine.”

Based on Geriatrics Society disclosures it was Found The pain recommendations were made by a group of 10 experts. “five had financial ties to opioid companies, as paid speakers, consultants or advisers at the time the guidelines were issued.”

The Epoch Times Reaches Out To Other Medical Associations

The Epoch Times asked the North American Spine Society to comment on the BMJ’s characterization of its industry funding and Jeff Karzen, senior manager of publications at Society, said he had no comment.

Dr. James Kirkpatrick, Chair of the American College of Cardiology [ACC] The Epoch Times received information from the Ethics and Compliance Committee about the BMJ article’s figures. “The ACC itself collaborates with industry, including in the administration of unrestricted, multi-company financial support. In doing so, we follow the highest standards of oversight, transparent structure, and unbiased management.”

“It is worth noting that, in the BMJ study, more than 90 percent of payments made to ACC leaders was in the form of research support, which is categorically different than direct payments to physicians and other transfers of value, as it is usually administered through a third party, such as a medical school, research institute, or granting agency,” He wrote.

The American Society of Clinical Oncology also emphasized research support when responding to The Epoch Times’ request for a comment. “As referenced by the BMJ article, the majority of financial relationships with healthcare companies were related to research and paid directly to academic institutions,” The Society said so. “This research serves an important role in clinical oncology and is critical to making progress against cancer through improved treatments that advance cancer care for patients.”

The Society’s website states: “ASCO regards the management of potential conflicts of interest as paramount to the integrity of ASCO’s programs, products, and services. Its COI policy primarily relies on “disclosure of all financial relationships that might result in actual, potential, or perceived conflicts of interest” However, “recognizes that some relationships cannot be managed with disclosure alone and identifies additional management steps in this case.”

Conclusion

Although PMAs can be invaluable in research and raising awareness about respective diseases, publishing journals, and providing medical education, some medical voices wish for more transparency with the industry, particularly when it comes practice guidelines. Both the authors and editors in the Annals of Family Medicine and Jacobin have noted, the sales of pharmaceutical products should never come before patients’ interests.

You can search the site to find out if there is any industry funding for medical professionals, hospitals, or medical centers you might visit. CMS Open Payments database. Another useful database where such information can be searched is ProPublica’s Dollars Site for Docs

The views expressed in this article reflect the views only of the author. They do not necessarily reflect those of The Epoch Times. Epoch Health All are welcome to engage in professional discussion. Follow these guidelines to submit your opinion piece. Use our form below.