--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb <no_reply@...> wrote: > > For those who "got" the gist of the post I made the other day about the > POM Wonderful lawsuit and what it implied about the state of science > (most drug "studies" being paid for by the people who will profit from > positive results being reported by the researchers), here are a few > links to show that I was far from alone in being concerned.
Interesting and very disturbing. Nothing wrong with scientific method just too much money at stake I suppose, real shame drug companies have to resort to this sort of thing but drugs are getting harder to develop because the easy work has been done I guess and it's very expensive to test something. This isn't an excuse there has to be some sort of restructuring of funding and laws about publication of evidence. I remember the first time this came to my attention with Prozac, they launched a major PR exercise and got some shrink to lie about how good it was and could transform your life even if you weren't suffering from depression! People took to it and swallowed the stuff like M&Ms. I was shocked when the truth came out, maybe I shouldn't have been but you hope the hypocratic oath stands for something, and even later they find it's no better than a placebo. Another thing that annoys me as the amount journals charge to read papers, all you can access is the abstract and you can pay $20 for a read of the data. Should all be free to make it easier to research things. . > > Just How Scientific is "Science-Based Medicine" Really? > Nearly 90 Percent of Cancer Studies Cannot be Replicated > > > http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2012/07/12/drug-compa\ > nies-on-scientific-fraud.aspx > <http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2012/07/12/drug-comp\ > anies-on-scientific-fraud.aspx> > The mainly unreported large number of retractions in scientific studies > <http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/05/120529181145.htm> > <http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/05/120529181145.htm> > http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/05/120529181145.htm > <http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/05/120529181145.htm> > > http://retractionwatch.wordpress.com/2012/05/17/is-misconduct-more-likel\ > y-in-drug-trials-than-in-other-biomedical-research/ > <http://retractionwatch.wordpress.com/2012/05/17/is-misconduct-more-like\ > ly-in-drug-trials-than-in-other-biomedical-research/> > Precious research money is wasted on unreal results, but we can change > the culture of science. > > > <http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2012/08/reprod\ > ucing_scientific_studies_a_good_housekeeping_seal_of_approval_.html> > http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2012/08/reprodu\ > cing_scientific_studies_a_good_housekeeping_seal_of_approval_.html > <http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2012/08/reprod\ > ucing_scientific_studies_a_good_housekeeping_seal_of_approval_.html> > Most People Who Take Blood Pressure Medication Possibly Shouldn't > An independent analysis finds no real benefit for people with mild > hypertension. > > > <http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/medical_examiner/2012/\ > 08/blood_pressure_drugs_for_mild_hypertension_not_proven_to_prevent_hear\ > t_attacks_strokes_or_early_death.html> > <http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/medical_examiner/2012/\ > 08/blood_pressure_drugs_for_mild_hypertension_not_proven_to_prevent_hear\ > t_attacks_strokes_or_early_death.html%20> > http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/medical_examiner/2012/0\ > 8/blood_pressure_drugs_for_mild_hypertension_not_proven_to_prevent_heart\ > _attacks_strokes_or_early_death.html > <http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/medical_examiner/2012/\ > 08/blood_pressure_drugs_for_mild_hypertension_not_proven_to_prevent_hear\ > t_attacks_strokes_or_early_death.html> >
