Assessing potential legal responses to medical ghostwriting: effectiveness and constitutionality

Pharmaceutical companies are extensively involved in shaping medical knowledge to market their products to physicians and consumers. Specialized planning is undertaken to produce scientific articles driven by commercial interests. Rather than the listed authors, hidden analysts and publication management firms hired by pharmaceutical companies are often responsible for the content of scientific articles. Such ghostwriting practices raise serious concerns regarding the integrity of knowledge and thus demand urgent attention. This paper analyses the strategies of legal regulation on medical ghostwriting and their comparative advantages and disadvantages. Many of regulatory proposals suffer from a lack of effectiveness, whereas others are subject to constitutional concerns. The analysis in this paper offers insights into framing adequate regulation; it supports the strategy for reforming the structure of information production while calling for cautiousness in shaping its regulatory outline. In addition, this paper contributes to the analysis of First Amendment jurisprudence, suggesting that the judiciary should allow a certain amount of leeway for political branches to develop effective regulation.