By Rich Whitworth
An independent report released by the European Medicines Agency on May 31, 2011, highlighted a number of recommendations to aid the agency in its communication of the benefits and risks of medicines. The report was the conclusion to a one-year project conducted by Frederic Bouder, PhD, at the behest of EMA, aiming to provide detailed, evidence-based input by analyzing the expectations and attitudes of the agency’s stakeholders toward communication on medicines.
Tackling a number of questions, including how current communication channels build or undermine trust, how the risk communication process could be improved and how that process could bridge the gap between opposite views and expectations, the research studied a population that included regulators, industry and third parties (e.g., patient and consumer organizations, scientific opinion leaders, and medical and nonmedical journalists and editors).
Read more….
[Note from SaneVax: When it comes to ‘bridging the gap between opposite views,’ the process is actually quite simple, in our opinion. Both sides need to present high-quality scientific studies, verified by independent sources. Both sides need complete disclosure requirements regarding safety, affordability, need and efficacy. When it comes to choosing medical interventions – it is a no brainer – if the proposed intervention is not Safe, Affordable, Necessary and Effective – you don’t need it. Just give medical consumers enough accurate, science-based information with which to make logical decisions.]
Leave a Reply