 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
||
 |
||
 |
Recommended Exposing Pharma |
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Philippe Even, director of the prestigious Necker Institute,
suggest that stopping use of the drugs could prevent up to 20,000 deaths and
reduce hospital admissions by up to 100,000 in France. In their [French] book, "The Guide to the 4,000 Useful, Useless or Dangerous
Medicines" they evaluated the
costs, effectiveness
and risks of the drugs available in France, some of which they say "are
completely useless." They are particularly harsh about lipid-regulating
statins and have singled out 58 drugs, that are used
for a wide range of conditions, like diabetes and osteoporosis, which they claim are
outright dangerous. Harvard Prof. Dr. Marcia Angell: “We
certainly are in a health care crisis, ... If we had set out to design the
worst system that we could imagine, we couldn't have imagined one as bad as we
have.” Author of the Truth About Drug
Companies, and former Editor in Chief of NEMJ.
destwo@yahoo.co.uk http://www.bmj.com/content/346/bmj.f2695?ijkey=E4DHSRQzgZwTWOT&keytype=ref Des
Spence, Md. Author of Bad Medicine,
BMJ article
wrote: The drug industry’s business plan
for diabetes follows a familiar pattern: “Conduct questionable research and control the
original data, then schmooze health regulators and patient groups to
established more inclusive drug-treatment protocols that is supported by the
questionable science. Recruit tame
diabetolgists, message them with cash, and get them to present at marketing
events masquerade as postgraduate education.
Pay doctors to switch to newer drugs in dubious international
post-marketing trials. Seek endorsement
from National Institute for Health Care Excellence [UK] to bully [with
guideline] doctors to treat diabetes aggressively with drugs.” 1. “Drug
companies have turned into
marketing machines. They’ve kind of lost sight of the fact that they’re
actually doing something which involves your health,” Marciniak says. “You’ve
got to take away the key components of the trials from drug companies.” Thomas
Marciniak MD FDA Administrator http://www.bmj.com/content/347/bmj.f6980?etoc= Health care is
directed towards maximizing income, not maximizing health—Marcia Angel, in
Congressional testimony, 2009. |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
Money
Talks 49 minutes, 5.300 views documentary in form
like 60 Minutes, on bad pharma, entertaining, very convincing http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zPLLMNCQB3U 6 minute excerpts http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tmp2n-vFdwk
The
information architecture of medicine Ben Goldacre 15 minutes, 7,000 views, both are on
missing data and how it prevents informed decision http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AK_EUKJyusg, by Dr. Ben Goldacre
Prof, London University School of Medicine, What
doctors don’t know missing data 13 min, 297,000 views http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RKmxL8VYy0MEf Effectively
exposing a major problem Drugs are tested by
the people who manufacture them, in poorly designed trials, on hopelessly small
numbers of weird, unrepresentative patients, and analysed using techniques
which are flawed by design, in such a way that they exaggerate the benefits of treatments.
Unsurprisingly, these trials tend to produce results that favour the
manufacturer. When trials throw up results that companies don't like, they are
perfectly entitled to hide them from doctors and patients, so we only ever see
a distorted picture of any drug's true effects. Regulators see most of the
trial data, but only from early on in a drug's life, and even then they don't
give this data to doctors or patients, or even to other parts of government.
This distorted evidence is then communicated and applied in a distorted
fashion. In their forty years of practice after leaving medical school, doctors
hear about what works through ad hoc oral traditions, from sales reps,
colleagues or journals. But those colleagues can be in the pay of drug companies
– often undisclosed – and the journals are too. And so are the patient groups.
And finally, academic papers, which everyone thinks of as objective, are often
covertly planned and written by people who work directly for the companies,
without disclosure. Sometimes whole academic journals are even owned outright
by one drug company. Aside from all this, for several of the most important and
enduring problems in medicine, we have no idea what the best treatment is,
because it's not in anyone's financial interest to conduct any trials at all.
These are ongoing problems, and although people have claimed to fix many of
them, for the most part they have failed; so all these problems persist, but
worse than ever, because now people can pretend that everything is fine after
all. Prof. Ben Goldacre,
MD, Bad Pharma, Page XI, Nov. 2012
INTERNAL SITE SEARCH ENGINE by Google
Disclaimer:
The information, facts, and opinions
provided here is not a substitute for professional advice. It only indicates
what JK believes, does, or
would do. Always consult your primary
care physician for medical advice, diagnosis, and treatment.
Positive bias averaged
32% (range 11 to 69%) in a NEJM article, 2008.
The study of neuroleptic drugs made a comparison of 74 journal articles
to the raw data which was obtained by FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) from
the FDA. See http://healthfully.org/index/id9.html,
or http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/short/358/3/252
|
|||