In a new PR ploy, The American Psychiatric Association (APA) has announced that it will end the practice of allowing pharmaceutical companies to sponsor meals and educational seminars at its annual meetings. According to the APA's CEO James Scully "There is a perception that accepting meals provided by pharmaceutical companies may have a subtle influence on doctors' prescribing habits." Scully added "While industry-funded meals used to be normal operating procedure at medical meetings, a sea change is currently underway in how we manage industry relationships. What was acceptable five years ago isn't necessarily acceptable today." Recent disclosures at Harvard University have revealed that psychiatrists have often hidden their financial ties to pharmaceutical companies. As part of a probe into doctor-drug industry ties, U.S. Sen. Charles Grassley had recently asked the APA for information on its financial relationships with the pharmaceutical industry.


According to APA President Nada Stotland, the APA was reviewing its conflict-of-interest policies even before the Harvard scandal broke. In 2002, the APA implemented a ban on expensive gifts to doctors from drug companies. Another common practice is for drug companies to fund continuing education seminars for health professionals at prominent medical conferences. Many of these continuing education seminars include free meals. The APA is one of the first doctors' groups to prohibit industry-funded meals and seminars at its conferences. Critics believe that these new rules do not go far enough, however. Shortly after the APA issued its new guidelines, the National Academy of Science's Institute of Medicine recommended an end to gifts of money, objects and drug samples from pharmaceutical companies to doctors.

Unfortunately, these conflicts of interest are somewhat superficial in comparison to other avenues through which pharmaceutical companies dominate the practice of medicine. In the realm of research, money to carry out studies is supplied by grants from drug companies, and journals that publish research in medical fields are often highly dependent upon revenues from advertisements by pharmaceutical manufacturers. Furthermore, government agencies that regulate health care, drugs, and health insurance are often filled with people who have current or previous ties to pharmaceutical corporations. For many decades government agencies have fostered an allopathic medicine monopoly over health care. Lobbying and campaign contributions from the drug companies and medical institutions ensure that laws are passed which support their business interests, which often are antagonistic to the public welfare.

Research that explores non-drug approaches to mental health, especially holistic therapies that include nutrition, mind-body therapies, and therapies that go beyond mere cognitive and behavioral approaches are minimally funded. Positive empirical findings and clinical reports from alternative therapies are widely ignored, with limited exposure to these therapies provided in the training received by psychiatrists and other mental health care practitioners. Any logical analysis of this system would cause one to begin to suspect that pharmaceutical companies manipulate the health care system and physicians' education in order to support their own businesses and suppress interest in using competing therapies. The APA's current policy change appears to be a public relations ploy rather than a sign of any meaningful shift away from allowing the pharmaceutical industry to dominate and subvert the practice of psychiatry.


Jed Shlackman, M.S Ed., LMHC is a Licensed Mental Health Counselor with a Master's Degree from the University of Miami (Coral Gables, FL).  Jed is a holistic counselor, hypnotherapist, and energy healer practicing in the Miami/South Florida area.
Learn more about Jed at www.phinsights.com

flag