Literature DB >> 20018987

Partial progress: governing the pharmaceutical industry and the NHS, 1948-2008.

John Abraham1.   

Abstract

Coinciding with sixty years of the U.K. National Health Service (NHS), this article reviews the neglected area of the governance of the pharmaceutical industry and the NHS. It traces the relationships between the pharmaceutical industry, the state, and the NHS from the creation of the health service to the present, as they have grappled with the overlapping challenges of pharmaceutical safety, efficacy, cost-effectiveness, pricing, promotion, and advertising. The article draws on the concepts of "corporate bias" and "regulatory capture" from political theory, and "counter-vailing powers" and "clinical autonomy" in medical sociology, while also introducing the new concepts of "assimilated allies" and "pharmaceuticalization" in order to synthesize a theoretical framework capable of longitudinal empirical analysis of pharmaceutical governance. The analysis identifies areas in which the governance of pharmaceuticals and the NHS has contributed to progress in health care since 1948. However, it is argued that that progress has been slow, restricted, and vulnerable to misdirection due to the enormous and unrivaled influence afforded to the pharmaceutical industry in policy developments. Countervailing influences against such corporate bias have often been limited and subject to destabilization by the industry's assimilated allies either within the state or in the embrace of pharmaceuticalization and consumerism.

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 20018987     DOI: 10.1215/03616878-2009-032

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Health Polit Policy Law        ISSN: 0361-6878            Impact factor:   2.265


  10 in total

1.  Towards a genealogy of pharmacological practice.

Authors:  Ricardo Camargo; Nicolás Ried
Journal:  Med Health Care Philos       Date:  2016-03

2.  Regulatory Capture in Pharmaceutical Policy Making: The Case of National Medicine Agencies Related to the EU Falsified Medicines Directive.

Authors:  Rasmus Borup; Janine Morgall Traulsen; Susanne Kaae
Journal:  Pharmaceut Med       Date:  2019-06

3.  Assessing stakeholder opinion on relations between cancer patient groups and pharmaceutical companies in Europe.

Authors:  Susanna Leto di Priolo; Andras Fehervary; Phil Riggins; Kathy Redmond
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2012       Impact factor: 3.883

4.  Marketing before patenting: implications for price controls in Canada.

Authors:  Joel Lexchin
Journal:  Open Med       Date:  2010-07-27

Review 5.  Drugs, cancer and end-of-life care: a case study of pharmaceuticalization?

Authors:  Courtney Davis
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2014-12-02       Impact factor: 4.634

6.  Food for thought? Potential conflicts of interest in academic experts advising government and charities on dietary policies.

Authors:  Alex Newton; Ffion Lloyd-Williams; Helen Bromley; Simon Capewell
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2016-08-05       Impact factor: 3.295

7.  Beyond unequal access: Acculturation, race, and resistance to pharmaceuticalization in the United States.

Authors:  Crystal Adams; Anwesa Chatterjee; Brittany M Harder; Liza Hayes Mathias
Journal:  SSM Popul Health       Date:  2018-04-12

8.  State capture through indemnification demands? Effects on equity in the global distribution of COVID-19 vaccines.

Authors:  Ariel Gorodensky; Jillian C Kohler
Journal:  J Pharm Policy Pract       Date:  2022-08-19

9.  The shaping of pharmaceutical governance: the Israeli case.

Authors:  Philip Sax
Journal:  Isr J Health Policy Res       Date:  2014-05-27

10.  A historical argument for regulatory failure in the case of Primodos and other hormone pregnancy tests.

Authors:  Jesse Olszynko-Gryn; Eira Bjørvik; Merle Weßel; Solveig Jülich; Cyrille Jean
Journal:  Reprod Biomed Soc Online       Date:  2018-10-23
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.