There’s an article in today’s edition of the New York Times headlined “Debate Over Industry Role in Educating Doctors.”
Yes – there is a debate. And it’s an important one. But the article doesn’t report on the debate – it takes a stance. Consider the first 17 words of the reportage:
“In the latest effort to break up the often cozy relationship between doctors and the medical industry …”
That’s not an article – that’s an editorial.
The article throws around a lot of big numbers. For example;
“Continuing medical education has become a big business in the United States, with more than 700 accredited providers. Total spending on such courses peaked at $2.5 billion in 2007, including a record $1.2 billion paid by companies, according to the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education, a nonprofit regulatory group.”
But these are numbers out of context. Statistics, as the saying goes, is like a bikini – what it shows you is interesting but what it conceals is essential. Here’s a statistic mysteriously absent from the Times story: 42 percent of CME activities have no industry support at all. Two-thirds of providers get less than 10 percent of their total revenue from drug and device companies.
Citation for that last bit of information – ACCME.
Selective reporting of the facts is unworthy of our national newspaper of record. As my grandmother used to say, “A half-truth is a whole lie.”
The complete New York Times article can be found here.
