Hi jimmie and Bert,

I agree completely with the theory that we are scientists, who research, evaluate, and make the best decisions. In real life, I rarely conduct a critical analysis of studies, I think I am doing well to skim the methods and conclusion. We are all too busy. Without really thinking about it, we tend to remember the conclusions that are presented to us.

http://apps.who.int/medicinedocs/en/d/Js8109e/6.7.html

from the WHO tends to support this (scroll down on the link's page.)

Or, if you just want to skim the conclusions,

http://apps.who.int/medicinedocs/en/d/Js8109e/6.14.html

Again, scroll down on the link page.

I just cut and pasted the conclusion below:


Summary of conclusions
Increased promotion is associated with increased medicines sales, promotion influences prescribing more than doctors realise, and doctors rarely acknowledge that promotion has influenced their prescribing. Doctors who report relying more on promotion prescribe less appropriately, prescribe more often, and adopt new drugs more quickly.

Samples stimulate prescribing.

Doctors who receive drug company funds tend to request additions to hospital formularies. Drug company sponsorship influences the choice of topics for continuing medical education and the choice of research topics and the outcome of research. It leads to secrecy, delay in publication for commercial reasons, and conflict of interest problems for contributors to guidelines. Researchers often do not disclose funding from drug companies.

DTCA leads to increased requests from patients for medicines. Doctors who prescribe a requested drug are often ambivalent about the medicine.


End of cut and paste.


Please watch this 5.5 minute clip

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DgyuBWN9D4w




Gene

Gene Nallin MD solo family practice with one PA Cumberland, Md