BulletProofBlog the blog on crisis communications

An article in the April 1 edition of the Journal of the American Medical Association calls for the dissolution of ties between doctors and companies that could potentially create conflicts of interest. Specifically, the article notes relationships between drug and medical device manufacturers and the physicians who write guidelines that direct how patients are treated.

But before codifying prohibitions on legitimate partnerships that could ultimately save lives, the AMA would be wise to consider a far simpler solution - greater transparency.

Preventing conflicts of interest in the healthcare industry is one of the many food-for-thought issues that arise in the current Era of Accountability. Doctors who engage with companies serving their sector do indeed have to be careful to avoid conflicts of interest - or even the appearance of such conflicts. Professional associations may draft more stringent rules, and that is all well and good. But those rules should be carefully formulated to achieve the stated goal without stifling the dynamic and creative advancements that benefit us all.

The problem is not that medical researchers collaborate with drug companies; it is that those relationships are not always disclosed as fully and frankly as they should be.

The real issue here is not collaboration, but communication. With the array of communications tools available these days, doctors and researchers can easily share information about their private sector relationships with patients, colleagues, and the public at large - and do so without inhibiting the cross-industry cooperation that produces innovation, social achievement, and even jobs.

For example (and this is just one example of many) doctors could use blogs to discuss research they are working on and what partners they are working with - being careful not to divulge any information that would eliminate a partner company' s competitive advantage or step outside the bounds of protocols governing what can be published prior to peer review.

A straightforward blog post that acknowledges the potential for perception of a conflict, accompanied by a strict assurance that there is none, along with the opportunity for the public to comment online, could go a long way in assuaging their concerns.

With the culmination of corporate greed, political chicanery, and the associated hubris of the last two decades that has eroded confidence in our institutions, all professionals, including physicians and medical researchers, have been put in the position of re-earning the public' s trust. But before taking steps that could endanger the fruitful collaborations that have served society well in the past, it' s wise to consider simpler, less drastic measures that would still ensure transparency and accountability.