Re: Drug makers deceive doctors

"eat this"... lol... Ok juvy boy. I did a quick "search text on page" for
"ghost" and zippo.

Hey crazy horse, let me give you a heads up - wit for wit most of the "best"
this or any NG has to offer fall far short of the Skeptic. You, therefore,
will be left looking more and more juvenile as you plunge into the depths of
"eat this" commentary.

As for the topic at hand - which you seem to need constant reminders on ...
ghost writing ... I do not deny it happens, but for you or I to accept that
it does because of an editorial piece (read: opinion piece) posted by one of
the posters known to this newsgroup to be a vile poster with a deep seated
hatred and venom for many in the medical field would be doing a complete
injustice.

Do you agree? Do you even understand or is this over your mane?

"fresh~horses" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Skeptic" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

news:<WkTlc.22054$Ia6.3198278@attbi_s03>...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The source is an online Canadian news source. The sources the article
quotes as proof of this are zero. Ilena... posting more hearsay, are

we?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

According to Star magazine - with just as many sources as your article -
George Washington was really a woman and Mars (or Saturn?... I forget

now)

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

is really an alien space station.

Of course, without a means of verifying stories, they are just that
stories - works of fiction. Have a good day (and do try to spend this

one

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

in reality).

Eat this:
http://www.nofreelunch.org/factsfallacies.htm

Pharmaceutical Facts
The "Research-based" pharmaceutical industry spends more on marketing
and administration than it does on research and development. (Families
USA)
U.S. Drug spending increased 17.1% to $154.5 billion dollars in 2001.
One-quarter of this increase was due to a shift to the use of more
expensive drugs. (National Institute for Health Care Management)
Pharmaceutical industry profits were 18.5% of revenue in 2001. For the
remainder of Fortune 500 companies, median profits were 3.5%
(FamiliesUSA).
Since 1995, R&D staff of U.S. brand name drug companies have decreased
by 2%, while marketing staff have increased by 59%. Currently, 22% of
staff are employed in research and development, while 39% are in
marketing. (PhRMA Industry Profile 2000; percentages calculated by
Sager and Socolar)
In a study by Avorn, et al, forty-six per-cent of physicians reported
that drug reps are moderately to very important in influencing their
prescribing habits (Am Journal of Med, 1982).
In a study by Lurie, et al, one-third of medical residents reported
that they change their practice based on information provided by drug
reps (Journal of Gen Int Med, 1990).
In a study by Steinman, et al, 61% of medical residents stated that
industry promotions did not influence their own prescribing, but only
16% believed other physicians to be similarly uninfluenced.(Am Journal
of Med, 2000)
Two and one-half billion dollars were spent on advertising to
consumers in 2000. Increases in the sales of the 50 drugs most heavily
advertised to consumers were responsible for almost half (47.8%) of
the $20.8 billion increase in spending in 2000.(NIHCM)
In 2000, Merck spent $161 million on advertising for Vioxx. That is
more than Pepsico spent advertising Pepsi. ($125 million), and more
than Anheuser-Busch spent advertising Budweiser.($146 million). The
increase in Vioxx sales in 2000 accounted for 5.7% of the 1 year
increase in drug spending. (NIHCM)
A study by Westfall, et al, found that 96% of physicians and staff had
taken samples for personal or family use in the preceding year. (JAMA,
1997)
According to industry estimates, drug companies spent $15.7 billion
dollars on promotion in 2000. $7.2 billion dollars worth of free
samples were distributed that year(IMS Health).
A study by Chew, et al , found that in the treatment of hypertension,
over 90% of physicians would dispense a sample that differed from
their preferred drug choice. (JGIM, 2000)
The AMA generates $20 million in annual income by selling detailed
personal and professional information on all doctors practicing in the
United States to the pharmaceutical industry (NY Times, November 16,
2000).

"Skeptic" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<8R6mc.36512$kh4.1813123@attbi_s52>...

Quoted message said:

"eat this"... lol... Ok juvy boy. I did a quick "search text on page" for
"ghost" and zippo.

Skep-censored said:

Hey crazy horse, let me give you a heads up - wit for wit most of the "best"
this or any NG has to offer fall far short of the Skeptic. You, therefore,
will be left looking more and more juvenile as you plunge into the depths of
"eat this" commentary.> >

Ahem. Wit for wit???? Har. Har. Har. More on "Drug makers deceive
doctors". Anytime you're respectfully ready to holler uncle I'll
graciously accept.
(fresh~horses aka Juvy Boy).

******************************************

Pharmaceutical companies accused of manipulating drug
trials for profit

By Jeremy Laurance Health Editor
23 April 2004

The multibillion-pound global pharmaceutical industry
is accused today of manipulating the results of drug
trials for financial gain and withholding information
that could expose patients to the risk of harm.

The stranglehold that the industry exerts over
research is causing increasing alarm in medical
circles as evidence emerges of biased results,
under-reporting and selective publication driven by a
market worth more than £10bn a year in the UK.

In cancer, heart disease, mental health and related
fields the industry has sponsored trials of new drugs
which have held out great promise for patients. But
when the same drugs have been tested in independent
trials paid for by non-profit organisations -
governments, medical institutions or charities - they
have yielded different results.

Heart drugs prescribed for abnormal heart rhythm
introduced in the late Seventies were estimated to
kill more Americans each year by 1990 than the Vietnam
War. Yet early evidence which suggested the drugs were
lethal, and might have saved thousands, went
unpublished."

Main story links to two others free:
http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/health_medical/story.jsp?story=514317

Link between industry authors and their results
http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/health_medical/story.jsp?story=514316

Firms become more aggressive as productivity crisis takes its toll
http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/health_medical/story.jsp?story=514315

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Eat this:
http://www.nofreelunch.org/factsfallacies.htm

Pharmaceutical Facts
The "Research-based" pharmaceutical industry spends more on marketing
and administration than it does on research and development. (Families
USA)
U.S. Drug spending increased 17.1% to $154.5 billion dollars in 2001.
One-quarter of this increase was due to a shift to the use of more
expensive drugs. (National Institute for Health Care Management)
Pharmaceutical industry profits were 18.5% of revenue in 2001. For the
remainder of Fortune 500 companies, median profits were 3.5%
(FamiliesUSA).
Since 1995, R&D staff of U.S. brand name drug companies have decreased
by 2%, while marketing staff have increased by 59%. Currently, 22% of
staff are employed in research and development, while 39% are in
marketing. (PhRMA Industry Profile 2000; percentages calculated by
Sager and Socolar)
In a study by Avorn, et al, forty-six per-cent of physicians reported
that drug reps are moderately to very important in influencing their
prescribing habits (Am Journal of Med, 1982).
In a study by Lurie, et al, one-third of medical residents reported
that they change their practice based on information provided by drug
reps (Journal of Gen Int Med, 1990).
In a study by Steinman, et al, 61% of medical residents stated that
industry promotions did not influence their own prescribing, but only
16% believed other physicians to be similarly uninfluenced.(Am Journal
of Med, 2000)
Two and one-half billion dollars were spent on advertising to
consumers in 2000. Increases in the sales of the 50 drugs most heavily
advertised to consumers were responsible for almost half (47.8%) of
the $20.8 billion increase in spending in 2000.(NIHCM)
In 2000, Merck spent $161 million on advertising for Vioxx. That is
more than Pepsico spent advertising Pepsi. ($125 million), and more
than Anheuser-Busch spent advertising Budweiser.($146 million). The
increase in Vioxx sales in 2000 accounted for 5.7% of the 1 year
increase in drug spending. (NIHCM)
A study by Westfall, et al, found that 96% of physicians and staff had
taken samples for personal or family use in the preceding year. (JAMA,
1997)
According to industry estimates, drug companies spent $15.7 billion
dollars on promotion in 2000. $7.2 billion dollars worth of free
samples were distributed that year(IMS Health).
A study by Chew, et al , found that in the treatment of hypertension,
over 90% of physicians would dispense a sample that differed from
their preferred drug choice. (JGIM, 2000)
The AMA generates $20 million in annual income by selling detailed
personal and professional information on all doctors practicing in the
United States to the pharmaceutical industry (NY Times, November 16,
2000).