- Home
- Mission Statement
- Daily Vaccine News
- Daily News Archive
- Sandy's Column
- Sandy, Other
- Adverse Reactions
- Age of Autism - UPI
- Archived Sections
- Blogs
- Books
- Contact
- Donate
- Hilary and Ginger
- Important Notices
- Medical Journals
- Other Websites
- Political Action
- Privacy Statement
- RedFlags Archive
- State Laws
- Testimonials
- Unconventional Wisdom
- Vaccination Council
- Vaccine Research Library
- Vaccines, Pipeline
- Videos
- Video Archive
Western medicine: a confidence trick driven by the drug industry?http://bmj.com/cgi/content/full/325/7358/0/h
Editor's choiceWestern medicine: a confidence trick driven by the drug industry?Might Western medicine be a confidence trick driven by the drug industry,
wonders Minerva (p
288). She is quoting Phil Hammond Those interested by Hammond's question can reflect on relevant evidence in this week's journal. Silvio Garattini and Vittorio Bertele' review 12 anticancer drugs approved in the past six years by the European Medicines Evaluation Agency (p 269). They conclude that the benefits offered by the drugs are trivial but the costs enormous. Some are 350 times more costly than existing drugs. Ray Moynihan describes "the blaze of publicity" sparked in the United States by football star Ricky Williams revealing that he has social anxiety disorder but has benefited from the drug Paxil (paroxetine) (p 286). Not all the media reports disclosed that Williams was being paid by GlaxoSmithKline, which last year earned US$2.7bn from sales of paroxetine. "Celebrity selling" is the rage. Unfortunately "shy people" or those with a "public speaking problem" may be encouraged to think of themselves as "diseased" and to take drugs of limited effectiveness with established side effects. But the influence of the pharmaceutical industry extends beyond the American mass media into the science published in the BMJ. Lise Kjaergard and Bodil Als-Nielson have taken advantage of the fact that for some years the BMJ has required the authors of studies to give their source of funding and disclose competing interests (p 249). They find that those authors who have financial competing interests are more likely than those who do not to favour experimental interventions in randomised controlled trials. This was true of both pharmacological and non-pharmacological trials. Could this finding be true only for the BMJ? They authors can't see why and point out that the other major general journals publish a far higher proportion of trials funded by the pharmaceutical industry than the BMJ. Competing interests were a major debating point in the court case that
concluded this week in which more than 100 women sued the
manufacturers of third generation contraceptive pills because they
failed to warn of the increased risk of thromboembolic disease (p
237). The judge ruled that there was no increased risk, which
conflicts with the conclusion of a systematic review published in the
BMJ (2001;323:131)[Abstract/Full
Text]. It seems unlikely that this judgment
will end the controversy, and we hope to publish an editorial next
week.
Footnotes To receive Editor's choice by email each week subscribe via our website: www.bmj.com/cgi/customalert
Rapid Responses:Read all Rapid Responses
Other related articles in BMJ:
ALL INFORMATION, DATA, AND
MATERIAL CONTAINED, PRESENTED, OR PROVIDED HERE IS FOR GENERAL INFORMATION
PURPOSES ONLY AND IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED AS REFLECTING THE KNOWLEDGE OR OPINIONS
OF THE PUBLISHER, AND IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED OR INTENDED AS PROVIDING MEDICAL OR
LEGAL ADVICE. THE DECISION WHETHER OR NOT TO VACCINATE IS AN IMPORTANT AND
COMPLEX ISSUE AND SHOULD BE MADE BY YOU, AND YOU ALONE, IN CONSULTATION WITH
YOUR HEALTH CARE PROVIDER.
DISCLAIMER: All information, data, and material contained, presented, or provided here is for general information purposes only and is not to be construed as reflecting the knowledge or opinions of the publisher, and is not to be construed or intended as providing medical or legal advice. The decision whether or not to vaccinate is an important and complex issue and should be made by you, and you alone, in consultation with your health care provider.
Copyright 2012 by Vaccination News, A Non-Profit Corporation. All Rights Reserved. This content may not be copied unless permission in writing from Sandy Gottstein has been obtained. 
|
 "A foolish faith in authority is the worst enemy of truth." -- Albert Einstein, letter to a friend, 1901 "I know of no safe depository of the ultimate powers of the society but the people themselves, and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them, but to inform their discretion by education." -- Thomas Jefferson, letter to William C. Jarvis, September 28, 1820 "What's the point of vaccination if it doesn't protect you from the unvaccinated?" -- Sandy Gottstein "Who gets to decide what the greater good is and how many will be sacrificed to it?" -- Sandy Gottstein |
doctor,
broadcaster, stand up comedian, satirist, and trainee guru. Any
who are offended by the impertinence of the question might do well to
reflect on the value of satirists. Long after 99.9% of 18th century
Dublin physicians have been forgotten, the writings of their
theological colleague Jonathan Swift are known across the world.
"Satire," wrote Swift, "is a sort of glass, wherein beholders do
generally discover everybody's face but their own." 