Introduction

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).

Related articles:

• Large corporations spin science to their advantage
• Evidence based science or prostitution?

Cardiologists receive millions of euros from medical companies without permission

Original headline: Cardiologen krijgen zonder toestemming miljoenen euro’s van medische bedrijven
https://nos.nl/artikel/2444561-cardiologen-krijgen-zonder-toestemming-miljoenen-euro-s-van-medische-bedrijven
Authors: Siebe Sietsma, Anna Pruis, Sjoerd Mouissie / “NOS” and “Nieuwsuur” research editors
Published: September 14, 2022, in “NOS Nieuws”

[Translated from Dutch into English via Google Translate, by Admin]

Dozens of cardiologists receive millions of euros from the medical industry, behind the backs of hospitals. For those payments, they must obtain prior approval from their hospital board to avoid a conflict of interest. But that doesn’t happen in many cases.

The research editors of NOS and Nieuwsuur analyzed hundreds of payments from the medical industry to specialists by combining different databases. This showed that cardiologists in non-academic hospitals receive a lot of money from their private limited companies and foundations compared to other specialists and hospitals.

How did the research editors of the NOS and Nieuwsuur arrive at these conclusions? You can read more about this in this extensive article. Full responses from hospitals, cardiologists and other organizations can also be found here.

Payments are not uncommon. Medical companies regularly sponsor specialists to carry out scientific studies, for example. This is only allowed under strict conditions, in order to minimize the risk of influence or even bribery.

For example, every payment from a supplier of medical devices must be approved in advance by the hospital where the specialist works. This is important, because doctors also have a say in decisions about, for example, pacemakers and stents that they use on patients. The doctor’s preferences should not include corporate sponsorship payments.

“It is astonishing that permission was not requested,” says Jaap Sijmons, professor of health law. “Medical companies employ a lot of lawyers and they know that the doctors need that signature from the board. The fact that a lot still happens in backrooms despite legislation is a big problem.”

No permission
A tour along nine hospitals where cardiologists collect relatively large amounts of money shows that at least seven hospital boards were not aware of these payments.

Three hospital boards did not even know that their cardiologists had the private limited companies or foundations, until the research editors of NOS and Nieuwsuur presented the payments to them. These are the Amphia Hospital in Breda, the Albert Schweitzer Hospital in Dordrecht and the Canisius-Wilhelmina Hospital (CWZ) in Nijmegen.

Table 1: Cardiologists receive a lot of sponsorship money from medical companies. Payments to cardiologists per hospital. Did the hospital know about the payments? Grey=Yes / Red=No / Pink=Partially / White=Unknown

The hospital directors agree in a response that they should have been aware of the contracts. According to experts, it is also problematic that the hospitals buy from the medical companies that sponsor their doctors.

“The risk is that bribery will occur,” says Rob van Eijbergen, professor of scientific integrity. “The question is whether cardiologists could freely and independently express their opinion about which resources are needed, or whether they were inspired by other motives. The hospital must therefore look at the funds that are received as a third party.”

Scientific research and expenses
The cardiologists of the three hospitals in Dordrecht, Breda and Nijmegen say that they have mainly spent the money on scientific research and education. For example, they paid themselves to do research, financed PhD students with it and organized symposia. They say there is no bribery involved.

However, they admit that the rules have not been followed properly. “We have to conclude that we have not given enough thought to request permission from the board of directors to enter into agreements,” say the cardiologists of Amphia Hospital, for example.

Even if there was a good reason for the payment and a lot of hard work went into it, without that signature you are breaking the law. -Jaap Sijmons, professor of health law

It is difficult to verify whether the money has been spent lawfully by the cardiologists. The three hospitals now conduct their own due diligence at the private limited companies and foundations. The hospitals also emphasize that the purchasing department works independently of the cardiologists.

But that doesn’t matter, according to Sijmons. “Because bribery is difficult to prove, there are clear rules: you need a signature from the board of directors for the payments, so that they can supervise. And even if there was a good reason for the payment and a lot of hard work went into it. “Without that signature you are breaking the law. Fines can be handed out for this and even a prison sentence of up to six months.”

Table 2: Top Cardiologist Sponsors. Total payments from medical companies to cardiologists 2019-2021. USA: Abbott, Medtronic Trading, Boston Scientific. Germany: Biotronik. Great Britain-Sweden: Astra-Zeneca.

The Health and Youth Care Inspectorate has announced that it will not enforce the law itself, but will leave it to the Code of Conduct for Medical Aids (GMH) through self-regulation. This includes industry associations of doctors, hospitals and suppliers of medical devices.

According to the GMH, its own recent sample shows that 5 of the 19 contracts assessed lacked approval. During that same period, the GMH has not issued any warnings or reprimands.

Do you have any tips, or do you want to say something else about this research? Send an email to siebe.sietsma@nieuwsuur.nl or anna.pruis@nos.nl

Part 2: What about the telecommunications industry and manipulating EMF research results? Headline: Payments from the medical industry to doctors difficult to find / https://multerland.blog/2022/09/15/what-about-the-telecommunications-industry-and-manipulating-emf-research-results-part-2/