Part 1: Headline: Cardiologists receive millions of euros from medical companies without permission
Part 2: Headline: Payments from the medical industry to doctors difficult to find / Below the picture
What is written in the articles about the medical industry and doctors, is of course not an isolated case.
Reason for publishing this article are the immoral developments in the telecommunications industry. False EMF safety guidelines, created by Telecom linked ICNIRP, are adapted worldwide, directly by WHO, EU, and copied by FCC, ARPANSA, Safetycode6. Governments worldwide agree with ICNIRP guidelines, and these governments force healthcare to adapt the ICNIRP guidelines. This makes clear that concerning EMF guidelines (blog Multerland offers info about EMF and health) and advise, healthcare is not reliable. Reason to sound the alarm for more immorality of scientists (cardiologists in the article) within healthcare. Reason to translate the following in Dutch published article, about the conflicts of interest between the industry and healthcare. Of course Telecom is doing the same as medical companies. Hopefully there will be research about Telecom and their conflicts of interest with immoral scientists, who research the EMF hazards, ignoring, even rejecting(!!) the biological effects, as ICNIRP commissioners and SEG members do. ICNIRP’s Martin Röösli is the world’s unbeaten champion of immorality in science, in medical science, concerning EMF, and the effects of EMF, RF, on human health. See also: The Odious Smell Of Truth (by Dr. Louis Slesin, Microwave News).
Continue reading part 2, below the picture. Payments from the medical industry to doctors difficult to find
Payments from the medical industry to doctors difficult to find
Original headline: Betalingen van medische industrie aan artsen slecht vindbaar
Published: September 15, 2022
By: Siebe Sietsma, Anna Pruis, Sjoerd Mouissie, researche editors od NOS Nieuws and Nieuwsuur.
In: NOS Nieuws
[Translated from Dutch into English via Google Translate, by Admin]
Payments from the medical industry to doctors are often untraceable and not reported according to the rules. The online register in which these payments must be reported is incomplete and has flaws. This is apparent from a joint research by NOS and Nieuwsuur.
At the beginning of this year, Minister Kuipers of Public Health informed the House of Representatives that the Transparency Register and self-regulation of doctors, hospitals and the medical industry would work well.
70,000 euros for consultancy jobs
The so-called Healthcare Transparency Register was established in 2012 to clarify the commercial interests between pharmaceutical companies and doctors. In 2015, the suppliers of medical devices also joined the register. Patients should be able to easily check via the registry whether their doctor receives payments from a pharmaceutical, for example.
But that doesn’t always work. An example: a heart surgeon from Erasmus MC in Rotterdam is paid almost 70,000 euros for consultancy work for Biotronik, a supplier of medical devices. That company also supplies equipment to the hospital. In order to make possible influence by Biotronik visible, the payment should be entered in the name of the doctor in the Transparency Register Healthcare.
But that is not the case: the payments are made by Biotronik in the name of his private company. Because the outside world does not know that company, the payments are practically untraceable.
The doctor and hospital acknowledge that payments are not always made in accordance with the rules, but emphasize that there is no conflict of interest. Biotronik does not respond to phone calls, LinkedIn messages and certified mail.
The research editors of NOS and Nieuwsuur found hundreds of payments to companies from individual doctors that are so untraceable. In total, this concerns 14 million euros in three years.
In 2009, a majority of the Dutch House of Representatives voted in favor of a motion by PvdA, GroenLinks and VVD to lay down the financial ties between pharmaceutical companies and doctors through legislation. The reason was, among other things, the fuss about virologist Ab Osterhaus during the Mexican flu epidemic. He recommended a flu vaccine from a company in which he also had shares.
The Healthcare Transparency Register was subsequently launched in 2012, but it did not fully meet the motion: reporting financial relationships was not regulated by legislation, but by self-regulation. The PvdA has submitted a private member’s bill to make mentioning the relations legally mandatory.
The registry also has all kinds of technical flaws. For example, there are often error messages and it is not possible to search for payments. In addition, all payments from the 2018 calendar year were missing for months, making it seem that some doctors did not receive any money in that year.
The Healthcare Transparency Register says in a response that it will further investigate the technical shortcomings in the register. Furthermore, the organization says it is unable to assess whether payments were indeed incorrectly not included in the register. This would require underlying contracts. Those contracts are not available, partly because they often contain confidentiality clauses.