Australian Dental Journal
The official journal of the Australian Dental Association
EDITORIAL
Australian Dental Journal 2015; 60: 137 doi: 10.1111/adj.12334
Dentistry and the Dental Industry I have just returned home from yet another successful ADA Congress. It always is impressive to see so many people attending this biennial event. Presumably of their own volition, dentists and allied personnel attend this meeting for the sole purpose of continuing dental education. This may be through attending lectures, workshops or merely catching up with professional colleagues to find out what is the current state of play. But there is another very important component to ADA Congresses. It is the dental industry. Without the support of the dental industry I am sure ADA Congresses could not happen. The industry is extremely supportive of this event, paying large sums of money for the right to sponsor events, speakers, display space and support for the meeting as a whole. For this we should all be very grateful and thankful. A quick look at the sponsors of the recent ADA Congress reveals a very broad range of sponsors covering such diverse products as the obvious dental products, equipment and materials but also finance (personal and business), books and journals, travel, and so the list goes on. Clearly the majority of sponsors are related to dental products that we use in our everyday practices. Obviously the speakers sponsored by these companies will present the benefits of specific products. Is there anything wrong with this? Well, provided it is clear that it is an industry sponsored lecture and provided the lecturer declares their relationship with the company and any other commercial relationships, then the answer is a resounding no. We must be quite clear that the dental industry plays a very big part in our professional education experience. Just think of how little we would know if it had not been for the vast sums of money expended by oral care product manufacturers, implant companies and dental materials companies sharing with us the virtues of their products. We also relish the unbiased, non-sponsored lecturers’ views as well. From the two types of presentations (corporate and non-corporate sponsored), we can make informed decisions and decide what products we will use. Of course all of this is pretty much standard editorial fare and little of it is new or challenging. This being the case I want to share with you another side of corporate relationships which can be a problem for both individuals and the industry. Recently I was informed that at a public meeting concerning water fluoridation, an image of me with a corporate sponsor was used to illustrate how ‘bad individuals’ align themselves with the evil corporates and sell their professional souls all in the name of money. I was not present at this meeting, I was unaware such tactics were to be unveiled and I certainly was unable to defend what amounted to a public ‘roasting’. This was a classic example of being misrepresented and out of context with the thrust of the meeting which was anti-fluoridation. I think the vast majority of us agree that fluoride and its use is arguably one of the most successful public health preventive strategies developed in our working lifetimes. There are many large industry corporations who manufacture and sell fluoride products which are based on sound scientific evidence and good practice outcomes. These companies have given back generously to our profession immeasurable support through sponsorship of events such as the ADA Congress, student scholarships, university programmes and assistance with university staffing. I acknowledge that this can be seen as buying favour with the profession, but if it is done in a transparent manner is this wrong? I do not see the fluoride antagonists putting their hands in their pockets to support research or legitimate scientific meetings. To have a meeting and, without notice, publicly denounce individuals for professional relationships should be deplored and recognized for what it is – yet another example of the misinformed trying to exert influence and pervert the truth. Clearly a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.
P Mark Bartold AM Editor © 2015 Australian Dental Association
137
The official journal of the Australian Dental Association
EDITORIAL
Australian Dental Journal 2015; 60: 137 doi: 10.1111/adj.12334
Dentistry and the Dental Industry I have just returned home from yet another successful ADA Congress. It always is impressive to see so many people attending this biennial event. Presumably of their own volition, dentists and allied personnel attend this meeting for the sole purpose of continuing dental education. This may be through attending lectures, workshops or merely catching up with professional colleagues to find out what is the current state of play. But there is another very important component to ADA Congresses. It is the dental industry. Without the support of the dental industry I am sure ADA Congresses could not happen. The industry is extremely supportive of this event, paying large sums of money for the right to sponsor events, speakers, display space and support for the meeting as a whole. For this we should all be very grateful and thankful. A quick look at the sponsors of the recent ADA Congress reveals a very broad range of sponsors covering such diverse products as the obvious dental products, equipment and materials but also finance (personal and business), books and journals, travel, and so the list goes on. Clearly the majority of sponsors are related to dental products that we use in our everyday practices. Obviously the speakers sponsored by these companies will present the benefits of specific products. Is there anything wrong with this? Well, provided it is clear that it is an industry sponsored lecture and provided the lecturer declares their relationship with the company and any other commercial relationships, then the answer is a resounding no. We must be quite clear that the dental industry plays a very big part in our professional education experience. Just think of how little we would know if it had not been for the vast sums of money expended by oral care product manufacturers, implant companies and dental materials companies sharing with us the virtues of their products. We also relish the unbiased, non-sponsored lecturers’ views as well. From the two types of presentations (corporate and non-corporate sponsored), we can make informed decisions and decide what products we will use. Of course all of this is pretty much standard editorial fare and little of it is new or challenging. This being the case I want to share with you another side of corporate relationships which can be a problem for both individuals and the industry. Recently I was informed that at a public meeting concerning water fluoridation, an image of me with a corporate sponsor was used to illustrate how ‘bad individuals’ align themselves with the evil corporates and sell their professional souls all in the name of money. I was not present at this meeting, I was unaware such tactics were to be unveiled and I certainly was unable to defend what amounted to a public ‘roasting’. This was a classic example of being misrepresented and out of context with the thrust of the meeting which was anti-fluoridation. I think the vast majority of us agree that fluoride and its use is arguably one of the most successful public health preventive strategies developed in our working lifetimes. There are many large industry corporations who manufacture and sell fluoride products which are based on sound scientific evidence and good practice outcomes. These companies have given back generously to our profession immeasurable support through sponsorship of events such as the ADA Congress, student scholarships, university programmes and assistance with university staffing. I acknowledge that this can be seen as buying favour with the profession, but if it is done in a transparent manner is this wrong? I do not see the fluoride antagonists putting their hands in their pockets to support research or legitimate scientific meetings. To have a meeting and, without notice, publicly denounce individuals for professional relationships should be deplored and recognized for what it is – yet another example of the misinformed trying to exert influence and pervert the truth. Clearly a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.
P Mark Bartold AM Editor © 2015 Australian Dental Association
137
