Prescribing is a complex decision-making process influenced not only by patients' needs, but also by other factors, such as available resources, priorities of national healthcare policies, and market pressures [1]. The information on medicines and therapeutics that reaches prescribers is also one of these factors. The need for continuous updating of this information is vital for both healthcare professionals and healthcare systems, although keeping up with therapeutic advances in health care is challenging [2].In the last two decades, access to scientific publications and other sources of medical information has changed dramatically, from the need to gain access to information to the need to select it. More than ever, genuine data and news are diluted in an ocean of banalities. For example, it took 20 years, hundreds of studies, and millions of treated patients to realize that the so-called second-generation antipsychotics are actually no better than the older drugs in terms of efficacy and side-effect profiles [3].New information and communication technologies give users the opportunity to retrieve a wealth of information [4,5]. Nevertheless, the reliability, quality, and relevance of the information retrieved to clinical and public health vary, and the information overload carries an inevitable risk of "infoxication".Too often commercial interests-rather than clinical or therapeutic needs-drive the conception, design, analysis, interpretation, and dissemination of clinical research [6,7]. In addition, recent cases of fraud, suppression of negative results, and selectivity in terms of publication, such as those on selective COX-2 inhibitors [8], selective serotonin re-uptake inhibitors, antidepressants [9], and rosiglitazone [10], have shown that peer-reviewed medical literature cannot always be regarded as a valid and reliable source of information [11,12]. The design of pre-marketing trials, the conduct of post-marketing surveillance, and communication to prescribers are driven by the need to sell. Table 1 summarizes the main problems associated with the dissemination of information on medicines.The real meaning of words: is it possible to define "essential information" in therapeutics?More than 30 years ago, a World Health Organization (WHO) expert committee noted that despite the fact that thousands of medicines had been marketed in previous years, their public health impact was uncertain. WHO defined essential medicines as those that satisfy the healthcare needs of the majority of the population [13]. The WHO concept of essential medicines, launched in 1977, helped to establish that some medicines are more helpful than others and that essential medicines should therefore be available at all times in adequate amounts and in the appropriate dosage forms-and at a price that individuals and the community can afford [14].Similarly, in order to promote a healthy and cost-effective use of medicines, prescribers, other healthcare professionals,