General fitness, health and nutrition · Public discussion

Why you can't trust medical journals anymore

Started by Tcomeau · · Last activity · 3 posts · 377 views

This thread is locked and is currently read-only.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
General fitness, health and nutrition
Published
8 May 2004
Last activity
8 May 2004
Original author
Tcomeau
Posts
3
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
377
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–3 of 3
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. washingtonmonthly.com0404.brownlee.html

    quote:

    For the past two decades, medical research has been quietly
    corrupted by cash from private industry. Most doctors and
    academic researchers aren't corrupt in the sense of
    intending to defraud the public or harm patients, but
    rather, more insidiously, guilty of allowing the
    pharmaceutical and biotech industries to manipulate medical
    science through financial relationships, in effect tainting
    the system that is supposed to further the understanding of
    disease and protect patients from ineffective or dangerous
    drugs. More than 60 percent of clinical studies--those
    involving human subjects--are now funded not by the federal
    government, but by the pharmaceutical and biotech
    industries. That means that the studies published in
    scientific journals like Nature and The New England Journal
    of Medicine--those critical reference points for thousands
    of clinicians deciding what drugs to prescribe patients, as
    well as for individuals trying to educate themselves about
    conditions and science reporters from the popular media who
    will publicize the findings--are increasingly likely to be
    designed, controlled, and sometimes even ghost-written by
    marketing departments, rather than academic scientists.
    Companies routinely delay or prevent the publication of data
    that show their drugs are ineffective. The majority of
    studies that found such popular antidepressants as Prozac
    and Zoloft to be no better than placebos, for instance,
    never saw print in medical journals, a fact that is coming
    to light only now that the Food and Drug Administration has
    launched a reexamination of those drugs.

    Today, private industry has unprecedented leverage to
    dictate what doctors and patients know--and don't know--
    about the $160 billion worth of pharmaceuticals Americans
    consume each year. This is an unsettling charge that many
    (if not a majority) of doctors and academic researchers
    don't want to acknowledge. Once grasped, however, the full
    scope and consequences of medical conflict of interest beget
    grave doubts about the veracity of wide swaths of medical
    science. As
    Dr. Drummond Rennie, deputy editor of The Journal of the
    American Medical Association (JAMA), puts it, "This is
    all about bypassing science. Medicine is becoming a sort
    of Cloud Cuckoo Land, where doctors don't know what
    papers they can trust in the journals, and the public
    doesn't know what to believe."

    unquote

    another quote:

    What's in it for the pharmaceutical companies? Simple
    economics. It's Marketing 101. By penetrating the wall that
    once existed around academic researchers, drug companies
    have gained access to the "thought leaders" in medicine, the
    big names whose good opinion of an idea or a product carries
    enormous weight with other physicians. Companies target
    academic KOLs, or Key Opinion Leaders, in the lexicon of
    marketing, and woo them with invitations to sit on
    scientific advisory committees, or to serve as members of
    speakers' bureaus, which offer hefty fees for lending their
    prestige to a company and touting its products at scientific
    meetings and continuing medical education conferences.

    unquote

    American "science" has no credibility whatsoever. It is a
    joke. If it wasn't so tragic to the millions suffering from
    disease and medications it would be laughable.

    TC

  2. [email hidden] (tcomeau) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

    Quoted message said:

    washingtonmonthly.com0404.brown
    lee.html

    quote:

    Quoted message said:

    unquote

    American "science" has no credibility whatsoever. It is a
    joke. If it wasn't so tragic to the millions suffering
    from disease and medications it would be laughable.

    TC

    Here are a couple good examples of why that is all
    true.

    pbs.orgtranscript scienceforsale
    .html about how ADVERTISING companies are now controling
    science by buying medical research firms to "study and
    research" the very drugs they advertise.

    msnbc.msn.com3079883 Transcript of a great
    episode of dateline nbc about massive corruption in the
    pharmaceutical industry. A whistle blower comes forward
    about how he was sent out as an "expert" by the drug company
    he worked for to talk to doctors about their drug and
    decieve them.

  3. Then one hopes you will this very day send a letter to your
    various government reps to increase support for universities
    and federal support granting agencies to for public support
    of science and medical research. If this isn't done
    commercial interst will always be happy to fill in. You will
    this very day insist on expanded funding for government
    oversight agences so they can properly oversee medical
    research and applications for drug approaval. And while you
    are at it, insist that the supplement industry be required
    to show the same level of compliance as is asked for
    aspirin. Sceptical eyes should be cast in all corners and
    let science be science. Until then we have what we have and
    are forced to live with it. Did I fail to mention diet book
    authors and their claims which only do the basic science
    years after making the claims, what should be their fate?
    All of this is not new, we even had a variation of this
    discussion a couple of months ago. We get the science
    research we pay for, or we get commercial intrest paying the
    piper, it's your choice.

    Quoted message said:

    washingtonmonthly.com0404.brow
    nlee.html

    quote:

    For the past two decades, medical research has been quietly
    corrupted by cash from private industry. Most doctors and
    academic researchers aren't corrupt in the sense of
    intending to defraud the public or harm patients, but
    rather, more insidiously, guilty of allowing the
    pharmaceutical and biotech industries to manipulate medical
    science through financial relationships, in effect tainting
    the system that is supposed to further the understanding of
    disease and protect patients from ineffective or dangerous
    drugs. More than 60 percent of clinical studies--those
    involving human subjects--are now funded not by the federal
    government, but by the pharmaceutical and biotech
    industries. That means that the studies published in
    scientific journals like Nature and The New England Journal
    of Medicine--those critical reference points for thousands
    of clinicians deciding what drugs to prescribe patients, as
    well as for individuals trying to educate themselves about
    conditions and science reporters from the popular media who
    will publicize the findings--are increasingly likely to be
    designed, controlled, and sometimes even ghost-written by
    marketing departments, rather than academic scientists.
    Companies routinely delay or prevent the publication of
    data that show their drugs are ineffective. The majority of
    studies that found such popular antidepressants as Prozac
    and Zoloft to be no better than placebos, for instance,
    never saw print in medical journals, a fact that is coming
    to light only now that the Food and Drug Administration has
    launched a reexamination of those drugs.

    Today, private industry has unprecedented leverage to
    dictate what doctors and patients know--and don't know--
    about the $160 billion worth of pharmaceuticals Americans
    consume each year. This is an unsettling charge that many
    (if not a majority) of doctors and academic researchers
    don't want to acknowledge. Once grasped, however, the full
    scope and consequences of medical conflict of interest
    beget grave doubts about the veracity of wide swaths of
    medical science. As
    Dr. Drummond Rennie, deputy editor of The Journal of the
    American Medical Association (JAMA), puts it, "This is
    all about bypassing science. Medicine is becoming a
    sort of Cloud Cuckoo Land, where doctors don't know
    what papers they can trust in the journals, and the
    public doesn't know what to believe."

    unquote

    another quote:

    What's in it for the pharmaceutical companies? Simple
    economics. It's Marketing 101. By penetrating the wall that
    once existed around academic researchers, drug companies
    have gained access to the "thought leaders" in medicine,
    the big names whose good opinion of an idea or a product
    carries enormous weight with other physicians. Companies
    target academic KOLs, or Key Opinion Leaders, in the
    lexicon of marketing, and woo them with invitations to sit
    on scientific advisory committees, or to serve as members
    of speakers' bureaus, which offer hefty fees for lending
    their prestige to a company and touting its products at
    scientific meetings and continuing medical education
    conferences.

    unquote

    American "science" has no credibility whatsoever. It is a
    joke. If it wasn't so tragic to the millions suffering from
    disease and medications it would be laughable.

    TC

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.