In the past decades there has been increasing awareness of the high prevalence and wide implications of financial conflicts of interest in medicine and psychiatry. Misleading advertisement, selective publication of data, biased reports and clinical guidelines, corporate driven symposia and scientific information, may have profound effects on how a psychiatrist formulates clinical problems and selects treatment. Several sources of conflict of interest, however, may not be of financial nature, but related to issues such as personal recognition and allegiance to a school of thought. To avoid a major crisis in credibility, all potential sources of conflict should be disclosed and dealt with both at the individual level and within scientific societies, journals and textbooks. Operational proposals for addressing financial and non-financial conflicts of interest are presented, including a threshold for the definition of substantial conflict of interest. These suggestions attempt to limit undue influences and to preserve intellectual freedom in psychiatry.