http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/25/health/25ada.html

I wasn't really surprised that this type of thing goes on - after reading this article. Companies act as a lot of people do -- they do the best they can to paint a pretty picture to get their way. Companies do it to gain a financial benefit while people do it for that - and other selfish reasons. It makes me mad how companies are willing to put other people's lives in danger (by misleading them). The line that sums up this article is "balancing the need to raise money with core matters of conscience." If the conscience is ignored, chances are the company will do the wrong thing. The ADA's relationship with pharmaceutical companies is hypocritical - much like MAAD's comingling with alcohol companies. How can an organization properly get their message across when they are doing things that confuse the public as to what their intents and motives are? Are they really concerned with making a positive impact on the community by standing against "bad" things? Or are they mainly interested in the money they can raise for their "cause"? I think they probably are concerned with a little of both.