I was a speaker last week in another roundtable on “innovation,” something our nation is trashing as we pursue perfection in patient safety. If we want to assure that no patient will ever be harmed by a new therapy or procedure, none will be approved. 

Health Affairs and the National Dialogue on Healthcare Innovation (NDHI) sponsored this meeting. It was disturbing. We are pushing all the research and new product introduction off shore. Nobody seems to know how to stop it. The media is focused on hysterical reactions to predictable side effects. Patients who want the latest care need to be wealthy enough to go abroad to get it. Where is the balance? Why not give patients full disclosure on the uncertainties of new technology and therapy, while allowing voluntary use if coverage is associated with required evidence-development and strict data tracking?

Meanwhile, under media duress, some academic deans there (like Phil Pizzo of Stanford) have banned all faculty from accepting industry funding other than Stanford “approved” research -- no faculty can have accepted any speakers or honoraria, nor can any program be subsidized by industry. There is some virtue in this, no doubt, but this philosophy implies that there can be no ethical partnerships between industry and physicians, relationships with industry are inherently evil. This is wrong. Stanford’s faculty and students will suffer and be less informed as a result. Greater attention to and vigilance regarding stringent transparency of conflicts is a better course.

< Back to Listings