|
Indian Pediatr 2012;49: 999-1000 |
|
Shakespeare’s Honourable Men and Conflicts of
Interest
|
Sanjiv Lewin
Department of Pediatrics, Clinical Ethics and Medical
Education St. John’s Medical College Hospital,
Bangalore 560 034, Karnataka, India.
Email: [email protected]
|
Thank you for all the work put into the consensus
recommendation on Immunization and IAP Immunization
Timetable 2012 published by the IAPCOI [1]. However, I
humbly request the consideration of the following while
utilizing the information provided.
This consensus states that it is
primarily for pediatricians in office practice. The reality
is, that the term "office practice", actually means "private
practice", where we need to generate profit to sustain our
lifestyles, which is not unethical itself, but is dependent
upon patients who can pay. Methods utilized to market
vaccinations are sometimes controversial with aggressive
practices to market vaccines of questionable public health
significance, the huge margins of profits and ethics of
physician-industry relationships [2]. However, the article
states that "Competing Interests" of authors were stated as
"None" though, as physicians, we have much to gain
especially from vaccine prescriptions with excellent margins
of profit [3]. Our Journal states that competing interest
for a manuscript exists when authors have ties that could
inappropriately influence his or her judgment, whether or
not judgment is in fact affected. It is a matter of
professionalism and integrity for legitimate conflicts of
interest to be recognized and for the aware reader to
consider the implications of information derived from such
sources [4,5]. In addition, it is difficult to be convinced
that members of the IAPCOI (and many others not on the
committee) have never received any support, tokens of
appreciation and grants of any sort from the vaccine
Industry. It appears that they remain convinced that
accepting support has no role to play in their decision
making process though they are human. I’m sure that even the
Industry will disagree with them. Since this is a consensus
and data is scarce, it is necessary to reveal Conflicts of
Interests. Surprisingly, there were special invitees 9 out
of 10 of which are from the Vaccine Industries present at
sessions which is certainly a gross conflict of interest or
have I got everything wrong?
References
1. IAPCOI. Consensus Recommendations on
Immunization and IAP Immunization Timetable 2012. Indian
Pediatr. 2012;49:549-64.
2. Puliyel JM, Madhavi Y. Vaccines:
Policy for public good or private profit. Indian J Med Res.
2008;127:1-3.
3. Lodha R, Bhargava A. Financial
incentives and the prescription of newer vaccines by doctors
in India. Indian J Med Ethics. 2010;7:28-30.
4. Lumb PD. Conflict of Interest;
disclosure; peer review. J Crit Care. 2011;26:333-4.
5. Ricci Z, Romagnoli S. Is disclosing conflict of
interest like purifying the Ganges river. J Crit Care.
2011;26:429-30.
|
|
|
|