Who's paying for all this "unbiased" evidence? I've spilled a lot of ink over the years exposing the pharmaceutical industry's corruption. After all, no other aspect of the medical universe has a greater impact on our health than the drugs conventional doctors recommend nowadays for everything from allergies to zits… And nothing has a greater impact on how doctors apply the "benefits" of these drugs in their practices (in other words, how they practice medicine) than the results of supposedly unbiased clinical and scientific research. But the question of the day is: Where does this research originate? Think about it for a minute. How DOES the data that either exalts or condemns a certain drug become medical "fact" that doctors base their recommendations on? Is there an independent watchdog organization that tests every drug out there to make sure that the manufacturer's claims are true? NO. Is the government using the awesome power of our tax dollars to conduct scientific trials of patented medications before they go to market? Uh, NO (not exactly, anyway). So where does this "research" come from? Space Aliens? The Oracle of Delphi? God? As shocking as it may sound, much of today's drug-related medical research is sponsored by the DRUG INDUSTRY ITSELF. This wouldn't be cause for alarm if we could count on the industry's integrity. But lo and behold, a recent BMJ analysis of 30 drug studies (of both drug-industry and non-drug-industry origin) found that drug research funded and conducted by pharmaceuticals manufacturers was significantly more likely to have a favorable outcome than independent testing of the same patent medication… Surprised? I'm not. In this day and age, the overwhelming majority of drug-related studies in circulation are industry-sponsored. In fact, major pharmaceuticals makers now spend more every year on "research" than does the National Institute of Health! That's right - the vast majority of what our doctors consider pharmacological fact is the result of biased in-house research or flatteringly structured external studies paid for by drug makers. In other words, they're writing us prescriptions based on research that in many cases amounts to no more than creative marketing…
Comforting, isn't it? And if this isn't bad enough, keep reading… ******************************** The drug biz's comrade-in-arms… Who's the willing accomplice in the pharmaceutical industry's increasing dominance-by-deception of the medical world?
Our fourth branch of government: The (supposedly) objective and unbiased mainstream media. A recent analysis of Canadian newspapers conducted by the Canadian Center for Policy Alternatives concluded that so-called "news" reports about newly released patent medications are often incomplete and misleading. The study found that newspaper articles typically over-emphasized potential benefits of a new drug, while downplaying (or failing to mention altogether) the risks and side effects. In fact, harmful aspects of new medications were mentioned in only ONE IN FOUR instances! If you think this is only a Canadian phenomenon, think again. And it's definitely not limited to newspapers, either. Why does this happen? Quite simply, because the promise of outrageous benefits makes for good headlines and readership (or ratings) - while sounding the alarm about risks and side effects does not. It also happens because most journalists are lazy, and rely on biased press releases from drug companies and PR agencies as the basis for their stories. Bottom line: Be very skeptical of what you hear, see, or read about new "miracle" drugs in the mainstream media. After all, they distort everything else - why should medical information be any different? Your ever-vigilant media "watchdog,"
William Campbell Douglass II, MD
| 
