This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citing articles on Web of Science (1)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Related article  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

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

Dr Miller is concerned about an advertisement for a line of skin care products that is designed to appeal to a doctor's desire for greater income. From it, he concludes that dispensing is unethical because it involves a conflict of interest. Miller says, "The reason for selling skin care products in the office is not to benefit patients, but to enrich doctors."

My question to your readers is why are the two mutually exclusive? Why can't the sale of products benefit patients and doctors alike? Just as performing diagnostic tests, surgeries, laser resurfacing, and biopsies benefits the patient and provides revenue for the doctor, dispensing is no different from these services. All revenues received are for services rendered.

As a manufacturer of topical drugs and cosmetics for over 55 years, I have known and supplied hundreds of dispensing dermatologists. I believe that, while the use of private labeling may have . . . [Full Text of this Article]

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

RELATED ARTICLE

There Is Nothing Wrong With Dermatologists Selling Products to Patients!
Daniel E. Gormley
Arch Dermatol. 1999;135(7):765-766.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT