• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer

Dietitians for Professional Integrity

  • Home
  • Our Team
  • Resources
    • Advocacy & Action Toolkit
    • Conflict-Free CEUs
    • Distinguished Dietitians
    • Ethical Sponsorship
    • FNCE Guides & Reports
    • Like-Minded Organizations
    • RD Resource Toolkit
    • Statements of Concern
    • Understand The Issues
  • Contact
  • FAQ
  • Blog
  • Donate
  • Search

Jan 17, 2017 Leave a Comment

JAMA Shines Spotlight on Conflicts of Interest in Healthcare

Renowned medical journal JAMA Internal Medicine has published a collection of articles about conflicts of interest in healthcare. HealthNewsReview — one of our favorite health journalism websites — provides an excellent summary.

Many of these same issues are at play in nutrition research as well as between dietitians and companies that largely produce and market foods and beverages that contribute to a variety of public health ills.

Highlights:

  • “Researchers wanted to know if the doctors involved in writing guidelines for the management of cholesterol and hepatitis C had any conflicts of interest.”
  • “In 2011, the Institute of Medicine (IOM) published standards for what they believed constituted conflict of interest (COI). The IOM standards call for no commercial COI among guideline committee chairs and co-chairs. Commercial COI should exist in less than 50% of regular committee members. This study found that both groups — the chairs and co-chairs, as well as the regular committee members — not only had conflicts of interest that they disclosed, but also conflicts of interest they did not disclose (but were revealed in other publications).”
  • “Patient advocacy organizations (PAO’s) receive extensive industry funding. Two-thirds of those surveyed reported receiving industry funding, with just over 1-in-10 of this group receiving more than half of their funding from industry. Conflicts of interest with patient advocacy groups are particularly disconcerting because of the potential to directly misguide patients. These groups now have — for better and for worse — an extended reach and influence on the Internet. They also can author and dictate guidelines, fundraise, sponsor research, influence and guide media coverage, and shape public policy and perception.”
  • “The authors looked for potential conflicts of interest among 634 hematologist-oncologists who use Twitter. Using the open payments website, they found that about 80 percent of these tweeting doctors had at least one documented financial conflict of interest. Roughly half of the hematologist-oncologists were recipients of research funding. Nearly 3 out of 4 received personal payments (ie. checks made out personally to them and not tied to their employer).”
  • “There were really two motivations for looking into this,” says Dr. Vinay Prasad, a hematologist-oncologist from Portland, Oregon who co-authored the study. “I would see these doctors tweeting about cancer drugs who were only giving the upside to drugs I knew were not necessarily the safest or most affordable option. When I would bring this up they would tweet ‘it’s not a problem’ or ‘it’s not our concern.’ I’d then look them up and they usually had FCOI. So they’re tweeting about drugs and not telling people they get money.”
  • “The concrete examples of conflicts of interest in this special issue of JAMA Internal Medicine make it clear that the problem is pervasive, worrisome, and clearly has the potential to not only change healthcare delivery, but impact those who receive it.”

Share this:

  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)

Related

Categories: Recommended Reads Tags: conflicts of interest, Health News Review, Institute of Medicine, JAMA Internal Medicine, Journal of the American Medical Association

Reader Interactions

Leave a Comment Cancel

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

sidebar

Blog Sidebar

Social Media

FacebookTwitter

Subscribe to receive our quarterly newsletter and other breaking news!

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Browse by Topic

  • Academic Research
  • Advocacy
  • Distinguished Dietitians
  • Ethical Sponsorship
  • Industry Spin
  • Industry-Funded Research
  • Interviews
  • Photos
  • Problematic Sponsorship
  • Recommended Reads
  • Reports
  • Statements of Concern
  • Uncategorized

Tags

Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics American Beverage Association Andy Bellatti Big Tobacco California Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics Center for Science in the Public Interest CEUs Civil Eats Coca-Cola ConAgra conflicts of interest Corn Refiners Association FNCE front groups General Mills Global Energy Balance Network Hershey's industry-funded research junk food Kellogg Kids Eat Right Kraft Kraft Singles lobbying Marion Nestle marketing marketing to children Mars McDonald's meat industry Michele Simon moderation National Dairy Council Nestlé New York Times PepsiCo policy soda soda tax soda taxes sugar The Sugar Association Unilever World Health Organization Yoni Freedhoff

Footer

Subscribe to receive our quarterly newsletter and other breaking news!

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Recent Posts

Farewell to Our Supporters

Dear DFPI Supporters, Since February of 2013, we at Dietitians For Professional Integrity have been a voice for uplifting the registered dietitian credential at a time when corporate influences - both overt and covert Read More

Highly Processed Foods Can Negatively Impact Health

Good read from New York Times on how highly processed foods (and the ingredients in many of them) can negatively impact health by creating an imbalance in the gut microbiome. This is the future of nutrition. The fact Read More

Social Media

FacebookTwitter

RSS

  • RSS - Posts

© 2022 Dietitians for Professional Integrity