[Ip-health] IFPMA Won’t Support Global Disclosure of Industry Charitable & Educational Donations]

[srimmington@essentialinformation.org]

http://www.pharmalot.com/2007/08/trade-group-wont-disclose-global-contribut=
ions/

IFPMA Won’t Disclose Charitable Donations
August 22nd, 2007 12:15 pm By Ed Silverman

Last month, some advocacy groups wrote the ceo of each drugmaker, along
with PhRMA and the International Federation of Pharmaceutical
Manufacturers Associations, urging them to disclose their global
contributions. The reason? Concern that donations result in off-label
marketing by groups receiving funds mask the agendas of public policy
groups that debate policy issues, and allow researchers to circumvent
normal disclosure requirements.

In doing so, they cited Lilly’s recent decision to make disclosures, at
least in the US. Since then, Lilly agreed to expand its disclosure policy
on a global basis. However, Harvey Bale, who heads the IFPMA, wrote back
and politely declined to join the bandwagon, saying that disclosures would
be a burden and, instead, should be made on a national level. He also
notes that IFPMA already has an applicable code of standards.

This is an excerpt from his letter: “The implications of the broad scope
of ‘disclosure’ of whatever may be deemed to be, according to your letter,
company ‘affiliates’ and ‘associated foundations’ would inadvertently and
unfairly create risks for companies in being criticized for
non-compliance…

“The system that you suggest would, instead, create unnecessary
administrative burden while, in practice, not promoting access to
medicines nor addressing the alleged abuses described in your
letter…Contributions are made by co’mpany organizations on a country-level
and differences exist in accounting for these based on the nature of such
contributions.”

In response, Rob Weissman of Essential Action, says: “These arguments are
canards. The industry cannot claim to embrace transparency and then refuse
to adopt meaningful principles of transparency. Disclosure of charitable
and educational contributions is a small step, not involving any plausibly
proprietary information, that would have some positive effect in
mitigating improper industry influence over policy debates, procurement
decisions and prescribing practices. This is not a demand that is going to
fade away.”