Patients expect transparency in doctors’ relationships with the pharmaceutical industry

Brad S Dalton and Deborah J Richards
Med J Aust 2009; 190 (8): . || doi: 10.5694/j.1326-5377.2009.tb02506.x
Published online: 20 April 2009

To the Editor: We support the findings of Tattersall and colleagues relating to the disclosure of competing interests by general practitioners to their patients, and we agree that greater transparency in general is required with physician–industry relationships.1 Such relationships have the potential to enhance patient outcomes through quality use of medicines. However, in the interests of a balanced perspective, several points regarding Tattersall et al’s article warrant attention.

  • Brad S Dalton1
  • Deborah J Richards2

  • 1 School of Human Life Sciences, University of Tasmania, Launceston, TAS.
  • 2 Gilead Sciences, Melbourne, VIC.


Competing interests:

Brad Dalton has received consultancy fees from Amgen Australia, Sanofi-Aventis, Roche Products, AstraZeneca, Actelion Pharmaceuticals, Peter MacCallum Cancer Institute, the Australasian Gastrointestinal Trials Group, Gilead Sciences, the National Stroke Foundation of Australia, and Renal Research Tasmania. He was also involved with coordination of the meeting described in this letter. Deborah Richards is employed within the pharmaceutical industry.


remove_circle_outline Delete Author
add_circle_outline Add Author

Do you have any competing interests to declare? *

I/we agree to assign copyright to the Medical Journal of Australia and agree to the Conditions of publication *
I/we agree to the Terms of use of the Medical Journal of Australia *
Email me when people comment on this article

Online responses are no longer available. Please refer to our instructions for authors page for more information.