This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Lewis H. Margolis, MD, MPH
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

JAMA. 1997;278(19):1567.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

To the Editor.

—Dr Westfall and colleagues¹ seem to be in an unnecessary quandary over the ethical implications of the personal use of drug samples by physicians. The practice is unethical because it violates at least 3 duties of physicians.² The duty to do no harm—primum non nocere—is violated because samples raise the cost of care to patients, in that samples generate cost, ultimately paid for by patients, beyond the accepted cost of research, production, and marketing. Presumably patients have other uses for the resources that pay for physician samples. Another possible harm is through the possible improper use of medicines, as suggested by Westfall et al. The duty of fidelity—the obligation to serve the interests of the patient—is transgressed because the acceptance of samples for personal use makes the physician an agent of the pharmaceutical companies that provide them. The conflict of interest between serving . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Footnotes
Edited by Margaret A. Winker, MD, Senior Editor, and Phil B. Fontanarosa, MD, Senior Editor.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?