The complicated relationship between doctors and pharmaceutical companies is widely discussed in the scientific literature. There is growing evidence that these contacts influence which medicines medics prescribe to patients. Much less research is devoted to the collaboration between the drug industry and medical students. These relationships appear to be harmless, as students are not yet allowed to prescribe medicines. The presence of pharmaceutical companies in medical schools may seem natural to many. After all, who better than a representative of the industry can talk about the history of obtaining a patent for a drug, how it is used and its positive and negative effects? If a company has patented a new medicine, it is natural that it tries to advertise it. University hospitals are places where innovative therapies are often used and the latest pharmaceutical developments are tested. In order to support someone's health or even save someone's life, doctors need to know that a new medicine exists - so it could even be considered an obligation for drug companies to provide information about their products to the doctors and students working there. Often, however, companies prefer to share marketing material rather than reliable data. All this could be considered 'generous' activity on the part of the pharmaceutical industry, were it not for one 'minor' problem, namely that manufacturers often use medical education as a marketing tool. With pro-education activities, there is ample opportunity for manipulation and the operation of all the methods of influence described by Cialdini is triggered: reciprocity, sympathy, unavailability, authority, social proof of rightness and consistency.
(from the introduction)
https://mostwiedzy.pl/pl/publication/problemy-instytucjonalizacji-etyki-w-dziedzinie-sluzby- health,107912-1