That’s what a dozen advocacy groups are urging in an e-mail campaign begun this week. The effort cites Lilly’s recent decision to do so, at least in the US, and so the groups - which include Public Citizen and the Center for Science in the Public Interest - implore other drugmakers to follow suit, on a global basis.

Why? There’s concern that donations result in off-label marketing by groups receiving funds; mask the agendas of public policy groups that debate policy issues, and allow researchers to circumvent normal dislcosure requirements. Here’s the letter that the groups, which also run PharmaDisclose, ask individuals to send to drugmakers….

* * *

Dear (Company),

We are writing to urge you to publish a complete list of all of the charitable and educational grants and gifts made by (Company), its subsidiaries, affiliates and associated foundations. This list should be made available on your company website, include the amounts of each grant and the recipient, and cover grants and gifts made on a global basis. Such a system of disclosure would impose minimal burdens on your company, since it must already compile this information, but the disclosures would have significant public benefits.

There is quite extensive evidence that pharmaceutical industry charitable and educational grants have been abused to influence public health and public policy decisions improperly. For example:

* Purportedly educational programs sponsored by industry may improperly promote drugs for off-label uses;

* Policy think tanks and advocacy groups that receive funding from the pharmaceutical industry often weigh in on important policy debates - for example, in op-ed pieces - without disclosing their industry ties;

* Patient organizations receiving industry support often tout products sold by corporate donors, but fail to highlight safety concerns. These groups may also over-promote diseases and drug treatments sold by their corporate donors. They may lobby for inclusion of products on government formularies without disclosing their industry ties, and favor the products of corporate sponsors over others;

* Charitable organizations may be used as a conduit to fund doctors or their research, circumventing normal disclosure requirements and rules.

Disclosing industry funding to charitable and educational organizations is by no means a complete cure for these and related problems - many of us support much stronger restrictions or outright bans on many industry sponsorship practices - but it is a start.

The industry has begun to make some modest moves in the direction of disclosure. As you know, one major pharmaceutical company, Eli Lilly, recently began publishing its charitable and educational contributionss at least in the United States. And the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry’s code of practice requires disclosure of support for patient groups, though not disclosure of the amounts.

It is time now for each company to fully disclose charitable and educational contribution information, on a global basis.

We look forward to your response.

Sincerely,

Essential Action,
Washington, DC, USA

Alliance for Human Research Protection
New York, USA

Health Action International Africa
Nairobi, Kenya

Health Action International Asia Pacific
Colombo, Sri Lanka

Health Action International Europe
Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Health Action International Latin America
Lima, Peru

Initiative for Medicines, Access & Knowledge
Delhi, India/New York, USA

Integrity in Science Project, Center for Science in the Public Interest
Washington, DC, USA

Knowledge Ecology International
Washington, DC, USA

National Women’s Health Network,
Washington, DC, USA

PharmedOut
Washington, DC, USA

Public Citizen,
Washington, DC, USA