kebaldwin
Sat, Dec-31-05, 11:42
Who Really is Writing All Those Scientific Studies?
It's an open secret in medicine that many of the articles that appear in medical journals, often purporting to be written by well-known academics, are actually written by unacknowledged ghostwriters in the pay of drug companies.
These "seemingly objective articles" are usually actually part of a marketing campaign to promote a product or draw attention to the condition it treats.
The Role of Medical Journals
However, questions about the role of medical journals have increased in the wake of the New England Journal of Medicine's admission that a 2000 article it published about Vioxx painkiller omitted information about heart attacks among those taking the drug. One element that is being looked at sharply is the "ghostwriting" practice and the medical journals' rules of author disclosure.
Biased Information
Increasingly, the practice of medical ghostwriting is being criticized on the grounds that it could hurt patients by giving doctors biased information. Drug companies claim that they're providing a service to academic researchers, who may not be skilled writers, and do not intend that the articles be biased.
An Unknown Number of Articles
An analysis found that 10 percent of articles on studies sponsored by the drug industry disclosed help from a medical writer. However, often the practice is not disclosed. An informal poll found that 80 percent of freelance medical writers had written articles that did not mention their contributions.
Pittsburgh Post-Gazette December 13, 2005
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. Mercola's Comment:
This is not a new issue as I wrote about this last year, however this is one of the primary ways the drug companies are able to manipulate and brainwash conventional medicine practitioners.
They influence the very heart and center of the most respected medical journals and are able to create dogmas and beliefs that support the drug paradigm because it is blessed by paragon of scientific integrity, the peer-reviewed prestigious medical journal.
No matter what the industry claims, undisclosed authors paid by the multi-national drug companies have no chance of remaining unbiased. Why bother to conceal their identities otherwise?
Hopefully, the news about the erroneous and biased Vioxx study that Merck foisted off on the New England Journal of Medicine will lead journals and scientists to take a good hard look at the practices of conventional medicine. Not surprisingly, another journal -- Annals of Internal Medicine -- found itself in similar hot water earlier this year when one of the "authors" of a 2003 Vioxx study it published confessed he had little to do with the research.
Drug companies claim they're providing a "service" to lesser writers by providing ghostwriters. What they're actually doing is trying to spin the data and brainwash physicians to be puppets for their agenda.
A 1999 document that was disclosed in a lawsuit described Pfizer's publications strategy for its antidepressant Zoloft. The document included 81 different articles proposed for journals, promoting the drug's use for problems ranging from panic disorder to pedophilia.
The only problem was, for some articles, the name of the author was listed as "to be determined," even though the article was listed as already completed. They weren't helping out an existing team of scientists who happened to be talentless at writing -- Pfizer wrote the article, then shopped around for scientists to put their name on it to give it a veneer of credibility.
More evidence, folks, it always pays to be skeptical and observant when it comes to your health, especially with all the money drug companies throw at researchers as well as you in the form of advertising. When it comes to drugs like Vioxx, your life could genuinely be at stake.
That is one of the reasons why I publish this newsletter. To give you another view to consider as an alternative to the one being fostered on you by tens of billions of dollars of marketing influence.
Related Articles:
Medical Journal Drug Ads Often Misleading
$30 Billion Vioxx Recall -- The Dangers, Powerful Lessons & Safe Alternatives that Everyone Must Know
Finally Medical Journal Admits the Truth About Bird Flu
http://www.mercola.com/2005/dec/31/who_really_is_writing_all_those_scientific_studies.htm
It's an open secret in medicine that many of the articles that appear in medical journals, often purporting to be written by well-known academics, are actually written by unacknowledged ghostwriters in the pay of drug companies.
These "seemingly objective articles" are usually actually part of a marketing campaign to promote a product or draw attention to the condition it treats.
The Role of Medical Journals
However, questions about the role of medical journals have increased in the wake of the New England Journal of Medicine's admission that a 2000 article it published about Vioxx painkiller omitted information about heart attacks among those taking the drug. One element that is being looked at sharply is the "ghostwriting" practice and the medical journals' rules of author disclosure.
Biased Information
Increasingly, the practice of medical ghostwriting is being criticized on the grounds that it could hurt patients by giving doctors biased information. Drug companies claim that they're providing a service to academic researchers, who may not be skilled writers, and do not intend that the articles be biased.
An Unknown Number of Articles
An analysis found that 10 percent of articles on studies sponsored by the drug industry disclosed help from a medical writer. However, often the practice is not disclosed. An informal poll found that 80 percent of freelance medical writers had written articles that did not mention their contributions.
Pittsburgh Post-Gazette December 13, 2005
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. Mercola's Comment:
This is not a new issue as I wrote about this last year, however this is one of the primary ways the drug companies are able to manipulate and brainwash conventional medicine practitioners.
They influence the very heart and center of the most respected medical journals and are able to create dogmas and beliefs that support the drug paradigm because it is blessed by paragon of scientific integrity, the peer-reviewed prestigious medical journal.
No matter what the industry claims, undisclosed authors paid by the multi-national drug companies have no chance of remaining unbiased. Why bother to conceal their identities otherwise?
Hopefully, the news about the erroneous and biased Vioxx study that Merck foisted off on the New England Journal of Medicine will lead journals and scientists to take a good hard look at the practices of conventional medicine. Not surprisingly, another journal -- Annals of Internal Medicine -- found itself in similar hot water earlier this year when one of the "authors" of a 2003 Vioxx study it published confessed he had little to do with the research.
Drug companies claim they're providing a "service" to lesser writers by providing ghostwriters. What they're actually doing is trying to spin the data and brainwash physicians to be puppets for their agenda.
A 1999 document that was disclosed in a lawsuit described Pfizer's publications strategy for its antidepressant Zoloft. The document included 81 different articles proposed for journals, promoting the drug's use for problems ranging from panic disorder to pedophilia.
The only problem was, for some articles, the name of the author was listed as "to be determined," even though the article was listed as already completed. They weren't helping out an existing team of scientists who happened to be talentless at writing -- Pfizer wrote the article, then shopped around for scientists to put their name on it to give it a veneer of credibility.
More evidence, folks, it always pays to be skeptical and observant when it comes to your health, especially with all the money drug companies throw at researchers as well as you in the form of advertising. When it comes to drugs like Vioxx, your life could genuinely be at stake.
That is one of the reasons why I publish this newsletter. To give you another view to consider as an alternative to the one being fostered on you by tens of billions of dollars of marketing influence.
Related Articles:
Medical Journal Drug Ads Often Misleading
$30 Billion Vioxx Recall -- The Dangers, Powerful Lessons & Safe Alternatives that Everyone Must Know
Finally Medical Journal Admits the Truth About Bird Flu
http://www.mercola.com/2005/dec/31/who_really_is_writing_all_those_scientific_studies.htm