It would be even better to have this same kind of reporting by members of congress.

Who reports -- donor or recipient?

Davis: Donor reports, but the reports include the recipient's name, which is made public.

Vy good. The donor's got the staff...

Unless the government requires SSN (and that could be a violation of the Privacy Act) then when you look up Doctor Kim you will see 1000 names. What requirement is there for the donor to ensure the identiy is correct. Also, is it specific to physicians or all healthcare workers.

Hilzoy, your substantive, thoughtful and informative articles will be missed on this site.

Once a month I take a relative to her doctor's appointment and wait for about an hour or so in the parking lot.

It's astonishing how many sales reps visit one doctor in an hour--usually I count as many as 8.

All drive late-model vehicles.

My academic health center now bans *all* gifts of anything of value from anyone doing business with the university and also has an increasingly tough conflict of interest policy (for things like advisory boards, etc.). Definitely part of a very good trend.

Hilzoy, we are going to miss you. Thanks for your wonderful contributions.

Thanks for, with Steve Benen, making this the best political blog on the Web. I'll miss you.

Jesse Unruh, quoted by Ezra Klein:

"...if you can’t take their money, drink their whiskey, screw their women, and vote against ‘em anyway, you don’t belong in the Legislature."

They've incorporated a bill that's been introduced a couple of years in a row but never gained any traction. Basically, if drug company pays a doctor to speak at a conference, or a rep. from a replacement joint manufacturer brings doughnuts to a doctor's office, they have to document and report it. A few states already have these sorts of laws on the books (Mass. is the latest).

If it came out that some doctors were getting, say, hundreds of thousands of dollars, not for doing research but for various marketing-esque activities, I suspect that those doctors might become less greedy.

This is already illegal and companies that do it wouldn't report it anyway. If this passes it will mean the company can be penalized for the illegal arrangement AND failing to report it. Sadly, the money these companies earn for things that are blatantly illegal (like your example) far outweighs the amount of any penalties (that's why the same companies keep getting hit, they don't care). You won't see this sort of thing really decrease until they start dragging the doctors involved into court and/or some corporate exec goes to jail.

/Healthcare policy wonking.

I have a feeling this is a bluff. It's there to pressure doctor organizations by scaring the bejeesus out of their members, and this section or another like it seems to have persuaded the AMA to play along. If passed, this bill would be like forcing doctors to wear their underwear outside their labcoats. So many of them have cushy deals of one kind or another with Big Pharm and other suppliers, insurers, fellow doctors, etc.

I have a feeling it'll be pulled or shot full of loopholes before the reconciliation process is done with the bill, but the fact Democrats can get it through committee gives them a strong negotiating position. If this is the Chicago Way, more of this please.

superdestroyer: if you check the bill, you'll see the following:

"‘(1) IN GENERAL- The Secretary shall establish procedures to ensure that, not later than September 30, 2011, and on June 30 of each year beginning thereafter, the information submitted under subsections (a) and (b), other than information regard drug samples, with respect to the preceding calendar year is made available through an Internet website that--
‘(A) is searchable and is in a format that is clear and understandable;
‘(B) contains information that is presented by the name of the applicable manufacturer or distributor, the name of the covered recipient, the business address of the covered recipient, the specialty (if applicable) of the covered recipient, the value of the payment or other transfer of value, the date on which the payment or other transfer of value was provided to the covered recipient, the form of the payment or other transfer of value, indicated (as appropriate) under subsection (a)(1)(B)(ii), the nature of the payment or other transfer of value, indicated (as appropriate) under subsection (a)(1)(B)(iii), and the name of the covered drug, device, biological, or medical supply, as applicable;
‘(C) contains information that is able to be easily aggregated and downloaded;"

(there are more sections, but these are the relevant ones.) As they will have business addresses for the various Dr. Kims, it should be easy to find your particular Dr. Kim.

See how easy?

Bon Voyage. And would you please pack and take Pat Bucannan (the bald-faced liar won't-go-away-bird) with you?

Oh, dear, there seems to be a bit of naivete on this thread.

If a doctor is speaking about the effectiveness that a drug at conferences, and it just so happens the drug's manufacturers are footing his bill, that is not, AFAIK, illegal.

But maybe it should be.

Yessss! Now watch for who opposes it!

Too bad that the legal profession will not adopt the same rules as the medical profession such as not being paid for referrals or the ability to drop a client due to the inability to pay.

Badly need your help. Resolve to edge in a little reading every day, if it is but a single sentence. If you gain fifteen minutes a day, it will make itself felt at the end of the year. Help me! Help to find sites on the: Lace front wigs atlanta ga. I found only this - lace front Wigs information. Member Login  The Soaps With best wishes :-), Eljah from San.