Reader Comments

Post a new comment on this article

Divestment and then Re-Vestment

Posted by drdrtsai on 31 Mar 2012 at 14:16 GMT

What are we to make of the APA's rebuttal that DSM5 panel members have divested themselves in 2012? The most plausible next step is for all of them to re-vest themselves after the DSM is concluded. It is unclear to me how the divestment strategy skirts the issue of potential conflicts of interest.

Competing interests declared: I receive salary support through the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Health and Society Scholars Program. The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation's stated mission is to improve the health and health care of all Americans. I am a former board member of the ethics committee, and former member, of the National Physicians Alliance, a not-for-profit organisation whose stated primary goal is to restore physicians' primary emphasis on the core values of service, integrity, and advocacy. The National Physicians Alliance rejects funding from commercial health care interests and encourages its members to do the same. I am a former member of No Free Lunch, a not-for-profit organisation whose stated mission was to encourage health care providers to practice medicine on the basis of scientific evidence rather than on the basis of pharmaceutical promotion.