Monthly Archives: April 2009

The Baker boss responds to the alarm bells

April 29, 2009 – 6:00 pm

Garry Jennings. director of the Baker IDI Heart and Diabetes Institute, has sent in the following response to concerns raised at Croakey and elsewhere, with a link to a question and answer document on the Institute’s website:
“We thank everyone for their comments. This is an innovative donation arrangement so we are not surprised at the [...]

By Croakey | Posted in Crikey register of influence, Media-related issues, conflicts of interest, health & medical marketing, health ethics | Tagged , , , , | Comments (2)

Staying up to date on swine flu

April 29, 2009 – 12:30 pm

Anyone can sign up for email updates here from the Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in the US.
Don’t be deceived by the title – the updates are coming fast and furious.
But let’s just keep some sense of perspective; at this stage, the numbers of deaths are miniscule [...]

By Croakey | Posted in infectious diseases, influenza, poverty, public health, swine flu | Tagged , , | Comments (0)

Some responses to the deal between Sanofi-Aventis and the Baker

April 29, 2009 – 10:57 am

Dr Ken Harvey, Adjunct Senior Research Fellow, School of Public Health, La Trobe University, has written a long comment on my post below, and it is well worth a read. He also advises that he is putting in a complaint to Medicines Australia about the Sanofi-Aventis campaign.
Meanwhile, here are some other comments on the deal:
Dr [...]

By Croakey | Posted in Crikey register of influence, Media-related issues, conflicts of interest, health & medical marketing, health ethics | Tagged , , , , | Comments (0)

Who’s the loser with this clever drug company campaign?

April 28, 2009 – 6:30 pm

You’ve got to hand it to Sanofi-Aventis.
At the same time as the Vioxx case before the Federal Court is producing an alarming string of stories about the hazards of overly close ties between doctors and pharma (as an example, see this story in the Oz and this one in The Age), Sanofi-Aventis has enticed a [...]

By Croakey | Posted in Crikey register of influence, Media-related issues, conflicts of interest, health & medical marketing, health ethics | Tagged , , | Comments (2)

What is it about the whizz bang of gismos?

April 27, 2009 – 2:22 pm

The Government’s response to the 2020 ideas summit illustrates, once more, the enduring allure of the techno-fix.
If boosting research into the bionic eye is the best of the bright ideas in health, then clearly we are in dire need of some improved vision.
What a shame we didn’t end up with an idea like this instead [...]

By Croakey | Posted in global health, health reform, prevention, public health | Tagged , , | Comments (0)

Some critical issues for clinical practice guidelines

April 27, 2009 – 10:08 am

Agnes Vitry, Senior Research Fellow, School of Pharmacy and Medical Sciences, University of South Australia, has sent in this detailed, thoughtful response to the recent Croakey survey on the issues surrounding the controversial, commercially-funded Australian and NZ guidelines for blood clot prevention (for more background, see previous Croakey posts).
Vitry’s comments are well worth a read:
1. [...]

By Croakey | Posted in Hospitals, Journal articles, conflicts of interest, evidence-based issues, health & medical marketing, pharmacy, prevention, surgery | Tagged , , , | Comments (0)

Updating Croakey Register of Unreleased Documents

April 27, 2009 – 9:03 am

There is a new entry to the Croakey Register of Unreleased Documents. CRUD records the details of evaluations, plans, reviews and other such documents that should be released (whether by governments or other commissioning bodies), in the interests of promoting better informed policy, practice and debate.
The new entry is:
• The NSW Radiotherapy Plan  2006-2011
Our source [...]

By Croakey | Posted in Croakey Register of Unreleased Documents, cancer, health reform | Tagged , , , | Comments (0)

The guidelines controversy: what do the experts think?

April 23, 2009 – 11:18 am

Following the recent controversy about Australian and NZ guidelines for preventing blood clots, Croakey asked some relevant parties for their views on:
• whether  health departments, hospitals,  safety and quality groups be reviewing their support for these particular  guidelines in response to the concerns raised in the MJA and elsewhere?
• whether such agencies also review their [...]

By Croakey | Posted in Hospitals, Journal articles, Media-related issues, adverse events, conflicts of interest, evidence-based issues, health & medical marketing, prevention, quality and safety of health care, surgery, trauma | Tagged , , , , | Comments (1)

Some questions for Pfizer… and a prize for someone

April 22, 2009 – 9:49 am

On Friday, April 17, a Pfizer advertisement told readers of the West Australian newspaper: “If you are taking multiple medicines for conditions such as high blood pressure or high cholesterol, there are combination options that can reduce the number of tablets you take. And the amount of money you pay.”
The advertisement had a section for [...]

By Croakey | Posted in Media-related issues, consumer health information, health & medical marketing | Tagged , , , , , , | Comments (3)

The blood clot controversy thickens

April 20, 2009 – 12:21 pm

Last April, journalist Ray Moynihan wrote this Crikey article revealing that public hospital “guidelines”, recommending widespread use of a group of drugs to stop serious blood clots, had been funded by Sanofi-Aventis, the company that makes one of these drugs.
Moynihan subsequently also reported that an international PR firm Fleishman-Hillard, was involved in a high-profile campaign, [...]

By Croakey | Posted in Hospitals, Journal articles, Media-related issues, adverse events, conflicts of interest, evidence-based issues, health & medical marketing, health ethics, quality and safety of health care | Tagged , , , , | Comments (0)