Commentary: Evidence versus Influence in the WHO Procedure for Approving Essential Medicines: Misoprostol for Maternal Health

BMJ; 2014 Jul 31; 349:g4823; doi:10.1136/bmj.g4823

This letter was written as a response to a commentary stating that misoprostol for PPH prevention was added to the Essential Medicine’s List (EML) not because of evidence supporting its use but because of “influence and vested interest”. Winikoff refutes this argument by citing evidence that supports misoprostol for this use, and by documenting the history of misoprostol advocacy and research that together provide a strong rationale for EML inclusion.