We have located links that may give you full text access.
On Physician-Industry Relationships and Unreasonable Standards of Proof for Harm: A Population-Level Bioethics Approach.
Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 2016 June
The primary claim of this paper is that a widely used argument against obstructing, curtailing, or eliminating deep physician-industry relationships is deficient. The typical argument critiqued requires that proof that physician-industry relationships cause harm flows from randomized controlled trials. Chief among the deficiencies in this claim is the fact that this specific demand for proof of harm essentially guts the precautionary principle. In so doing, the typical argument neuters the basic justification for public health action. In place of this fallacious move, the paper argues that proof of harm can be demonstrated via evidentiary standards widely accepted within the knowledge communities of public health scientists and epidemiologists. The paper concludes by noting that while there may be good reasons to oppose curtailment of deep physician-industry relationships, the typical argument described here is not among them.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app