Vermont’s pharmaceutical marketing reporting laws have gotten tougher but if the law allows the pharmaceutical industry to keep secret limited information, such as donations to support academic research how complete is it? Making public the amount and methods of donations to support academic research is a very large part of the funding puzzle disclosure. The trade secret provision is said to shield about 80 percent of the information on these relationships. Explaining how much drug industry money flows to medical universities and institutions would show consumers how and why drugs studies are managed the way they are. A British Medical Journal article from 2003 reviewed 30 studies published in journals and found that a  “systematic bias favors products which are made by the company funding the research,”and the pharmaceutical company Wyeth was just exposed for paying ghostwriters to publish journal articles.

Vermont Attorney General Sorrel says of the research reporting loop hole,from the documents he has seen the marketing budgets for the pharmaceutical companies “dwarf” their research and development budgets.” The law is really on the companies’ side right now,”

Governor Douglas commented about his view of opening this area to sunlight.

He expressed support for the bill (with the exclusion of research reporting) during his weekly Statehouse press conference this week – as long as the bill doesn’t interfere with Vermont’s growing biotechnology sector.

Curiously he added “As a general rule, the more disclosure the better,”

Suggested follow-up question for Gov. Jim: “In what way might funding disclosure interfere with Vermont’s new growing biotech sector?

http://www.timesargus.com/arti…