The Washington Post on Tuesday examined the relationship between not-for-profit health advocacy groups and their corporate sponsors and whether the relationships affect advocacy groups' stances as patient allies. According to the Post, groups like American Diabetes Association and the National Osteoporosis Foundation generally do not offer advice or pros and cons of various drugs and "don't raise alarms about drug safety." Such groups instead tend to "portray themselves as advocates rather than watchdogs, committed to improving awareness of the diseases and raising funds to develop cures and preventive measures," the Post reports. Both the ADA and NOF say they are not influenced by the donations they receive from drug and device makers, which donate millions of dollars to disease-related not-for-profits annually, according to the Post. Advocacy groups are not required to disclose details of their corporate funding. Most release limited information, usually in annual reports and at sponsored events, but exact donations typically are not disclosed, according to the Post. Individuals who seek out information from advocacy groups might never discover the groups' financial ties to drug companies, the Post reports. Consumer advocates say that policy needs to be changed and that some not-for-profits "put their corporate sponsors' interests ahead of their patients'," according to the Post. Marc Boutin, vice president of the National Health Council, an advocacy group that includes not-for-profits and drug companies, said that patient-oriented groups see their priorities as differing from watchdog groups. Boutin added that patient advocacy groups know their constituents care not just about drug safety but also about access to effective drugs, regardless if they have serious risks. In addition, most groups have guidelines to follow in the event of conflicts of interest, Boutin said. He added that many health advocacy groups see the interests of patients and drug manufacturers as occasionally overlapping. Thomas Moore, a drug safety analyst at George Washington University Medical Center, said he does not believe groups' internal conflict-of-interest guidelines are working, adding, "The whole system is unbalanced because there aren't any skeptical advocates out there" (Ready, Washington Post, 2/7).

"Reprinted with permission from kaisernetwork. You can view the entire Kaiser Daily Health Policy Report, search the archives, or sign up for email delivery at kaisernetwork/dailyreports/healthpolicy. The Kaiser Daily Health Policy Report is published for kaisernetwork, a free service of The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation . © 2005 Advisory Board Company and Kaiser Family Foundation. All rights reserved.