another night with no time for a decent post. i found this piece on morning report today quite interesting. it's about some australian & nz psychiatrists who are boycotting their main annual conference, because they don't believe such conferences should be funded by drug companies.
the person spoken to explained how they had put forward proposals for alternative funding models, and the possibility of psychiatrists paying a conference fee to cover the costs. he also mentioned that the conferences could be done significantly more cheaply.
i know that accountants don't get commercial sponsors paying the costs of our conferences. accounting firms pay the costs for their staff and partners/directors. given that CA's have to complete 20 hours of structured professional development each year, it's a significant cost. i'm sure if the accounting profession can wear the costs, then so can the psychiatrists.
what was more telling was this particular psychiatrist talking about the influence that drug company representatives have on prescriptions decisions. decisions that should be made based on scientific evidence, not on slick PR.
good on this group to try and break away from the influence of drug companies, and i hope it's catching!
and in the meantime, pity the poor of california as their governor chooses to cut programmes that will significantly impact on the vulnerable, rather than raise taxes on the wealthy who are better able to weather the cost. i seriously hope that we aren't going to see shades of this in the budget tomorrow.