Register if you don't have an account. You know you want to ;)
user(s) here now
Health News Sources
Content violates spam guidelines
Content contains or links to content that is illegal
Content contains personal information that relates to a Voat users real world or online identity
Corrupt Medical Science
submitted 1.2 years ago by european
Scientific American: How Pharma-Funded Research Cherry-Picks Positive Results.
Richard Horton, editor in chief of The Lancet, recently wrote: “Much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness. As one participant put it, “poor methods get results”.
In 2009, Dr. Marcia Angell of the New England Journal of Medicine wrote: “It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of The New England Journal of Medicine.”
"I can't tell you exactly what percentage of the trials are flawed, but I think the problem is far bigger than you imagine, and getting worse...it is so easy to manipulate data, conceal it or fabricate it...there is almost a code of silence not to speak about it." -Whistleblower Dr. Peter Wilmshurst
"Reproducibility in science is not very sexy. Because our scientific culture generally rewards innovation over cautiousness, replicating a study conducted by others will not get a researcher a publication in a high-end journal, a splashy headline in a newspaper, or a large funding grant from the government. Only an estimated 0.15% of all published results are direct replications of previous studies."
Why Most Published Research Findings Are False-
John P. A. Ioannidis.
Silencing the Scientist: Tyrone Hayes on Being Targeted by Herbicide Firm Syngenta
"The neuroscientific community needs to challenge the current scientific model driven by dysfunctional research practices tacitly encouraged by the 'publish or perish' doctrine, which is precisely leading to the low reliability and the high discrepancy of results."
Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science (Ninety-seven percent of original studies had significant results (P < .05). Thirty-six percent of replications had significant results)
Back in the 1960s, a sugar industry executive wrote fat checks to a group of Harvard researchers so that they’d downplay the links between sugar and heart disease in a prominent medical journal—and the researchers did it, according to historical documents reported in the journal JAMA Internal Medicine. One of those Harvard researchers went on to become the head of nutrition at the United States Department of Agriculture, where he set the stage for the federal government’s current dietary guidelines. All in all, the corrupted researchers and skewed scientific literature successfully helped draw attention away from the health risks of sweets and shift the blame solely to fats—for nearly five decades. The low-fat, high-sugar diets that health experts subsequently encouraged are now seen as a main driver of the current obesity epidemic.
What doctors don't know about the drugs they prescribe | Ben Goldacre
Oct 2016- Ben Goldacre on rate of compliance with new trial laws. After an audit, about 1 in 5 follow the rules.
A vaginal mesh implant made by Johnson & Johnson (J&J) was launched without a clinical trial, and then marketed for five years after the company learned that it had a higher failure rate than their two earlier devices. Internal company emails disclosed in a US court case, in which a 51-year-old woman was awarded a record $57m in damages this month, also show that senior executives even briefly considered suppressing unfavourable data that “could compromise the future” of the device. But documents submitted to the court show J&J staff had raised concerns about the “spinning of data” in emails and male executives are seen bantering about a suggestion that sex with an earlier patient with mesh complications must be “like screwing a wire brush”. In other emails, J&J staff complain of colleagues “constantly spinning data” and of a dangerous blurring of the “lines between commercial and research” divisions. “I am continually amazed and surprised at our need to push back,” wrote Judi Gauld, Ethicon’s former clinical director in Scotland. https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/sep/29/revealed-johnson-johnsons-irresponsible-actions-over-vaginal-mesh-implant
It feels lonely in here.
1 minute ago by
It sure feels lonely in here. Why not be the first person to share a link or discuss?
© 2019 Voat, Inc. All rights reserved. Voat and the Voat Mascot are trademarks of Voat, Inc.