When developing a new guideline or updating an existing one, ACCP commits to producing a document that affects how clinicians worldwide care for patients. To do this, ACCP, through the GOC, must initially appoint someone to serve as the editor of the guideline. The job description requires a well-respected, unpaid individual to recruit content experts (also unpaid) who agree to work long hours to diligently review and debate evidence to write timely formal recommendations. This work requires bona fide experts who can lend a critical eye to available evidence and then mold that evidence into useful recommendations for clinicians. It is not surprising, then, that some of these experts also receive support from various commercial and noncommercial sources, which may create potential COIs. However, before becoming guideline panelists, individuals must disclose to the GOC all potential financial conflicts, which undergo careful scrutiny by the Policies and Procedures Subcommittee of the GOC. In turn, this subcommittee presents its review to the full GOC to determine if a candidate can become a guideline panelist. The members of the GOC take this responsibility very seriously, frequently requesting additional information before making a final decision. In the case of AT9, the guideline editor (Dr Guyatt and his executive committee including Drs Akl and Schünemann) recruited highly recognized authorities in their respective fields to serve as panelists, but the GOC did not approve 8% of these nominees because of COIs. Although the GOC approved individuals engaged in industry- or government-sponsored activities deemed to be irrelevant to their assigned topic, GOC disqualified anyone whose work was supported or directed by the marketing divisions of a company.