> Quack doctors spruiking amazing new treatments (that they hold shares in).

Doctors commonly have kickback arrangements to prescribe specific medication. Sometimes it's the correct course of action they just always go for the particular brand, other times it's the wrong course of action but they prescribe it anyway for the kickback (the OxyContin scandal comes to mind).

▲

defrost 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Pharma reps "bribing" doctors prescribing habits is a thing, for sure, and varies in degree by country.

This is a separate issue for media reporting on (say) new tanning treatments that are endorsed on screen during traditional "news hours" in undeclared infomercial segments that feature "independant" medical experts gushing over benefits of perineum UV treatments.

Frequently both the company that paid for the faux news segment and the guest experts that also benefit fail to have fiscal interests disclosed.

▲

buran77 an hour ago | parent [-]

Oh, I just meant it's not just "quack doctors" doing it. it's a fairly common practice.

	▲	defrost an hour ago \| parent [-]
		In a doctors suite: Doctors prescribing drugs recommended to them by pharma reps should disclose that connection. On a media "news" program: Producers of media programs should disclose any connection "experts" they interview on a subject have to the financial returns or funding of that subject.