"The way we are funded is public and can be checked in our annual report. The vast majority of our income comes from our members. A tiny part comes from the pharmaceutical industry (around 2.5% of our total budget), but it doesn’t influence our choice."
Smoke Free Partnership is precisely a partnership between the European Respiratory Society, Cancer Research UK, and the European Heart Network, that is, I suppose, the "members" from whom SFP's income comes from and who are probably heavily funded by the pharmaceutical industry. I'm pretty certain that most of the events they organize are sponsored by Pfizer or GlaxoKline.
Here is the annual report she refers to : http://www.smokefreepartnership.eu/s...eport_2011.pdf
More than half the funding is listed as "project funding various", nearly all the rest comes from the "members" (it's at the end of the document).
I haven't been able to find information about funding on any of the websites of the three members. Cancer Research UK seems funded at least partly by the government, and the European Respiratory Society is itself an alliance between a lot of organizations.
So in a word, Anca Toma Friedlaender is in all likelyhood a pathetic liar.
The rest of the annual report is a bit surreal. They boast that the directive consultation received 85000 answers, which is true, but they kind of forget to say anything about what the answers actually said ("leave us alone", basically).
A superficial examination of this "annual report" is enough to identify these people as small-time krooks.
Smoke Free Partnership is precisely a partnership between the European Respiratory Society, Cancer Research UK, and the European Heart Network, that is, I suppose, the "members" from whom SFP's income comes from and who are probably heavily funded by the pharmaceutical industry. I'm pretty certain that most of the events they organize are sponsored by Pfizer or GlaxoKline.
Here is the annual report she refers to : http://www.smokefreepartnership.eu/s...eport_2011.pdf
More than half the funding is listed as "project funding various", nearly all the rest comes from the "members" (it's at the end of the document).
I haven't been able to find information about funding on any of the websites of the three members. Cancer Research UK seems funded at least partly by the government, and the European Respiratory Society is itself an alliance between a lot of organizations.
So in a word, Anca Toma Friedlaender is in all likelyhood a pathetic liar.
The rest of the annual report is a bit surreal. They boast that the directive consultation received 85000 answers, which is true, but they kind of forget to say anything about what the answers actually said ("leave us alone", basically).
A superficial examination of this "annual report" is enough to identify these people as small-time krooks.
Comment