Thursday, February 05, 2009

If You Put Your Faith In These Glorified Drug Dealers, You Deserve What You Get

Drug Companies & Doctors: A Story of Corruption By Marcia Angell

Hat tip to Rick for sending this my way.

Recently Senator Charles Grassley, ranking Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, has been looking into financial ties between the pharmaceutical industry and the academic physicians who largely determine the market value of prescription drugs. He hasn't had to look very hard.

Take the case of Dr. Joseph L. Biederman, professor of psychiatry at Harvard Medical School and chief of pediatric psychopharmacology at Harvard's Massachusetts General Hospital.


Thanks largely to him, children as young as two years old are now being diagnosed with bipolar disorder and treated with a cocktail of powerful drugs, many of which were not approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for that purpose and none of which were approved for children below ten years of age.

In June, Senator Grassley revealed that drug companies, including those that make drugs he advocates for childhood bipolar disorder, had paid Biederman $1.6 million in consulting and speaking fees between 2000 and 2007. Two of his colleagues received similar amounts. After the revelation, the president of the Massachusetts General Hospital and the chairman of its physician organization sent a letter to the hospital's physicians expressing not shock over the enormity of the conflicts of interest, but sympathy for the beneficiaries: "We know this is an incredibly painful time for these doctors and their families, and our hearts go out to them."

Because these psychiatrists were singled out by Senator Grassley, they received a great deal of attention in the press, but similar conflicts of interest pervade medicine. (The senator is now turning his attention to cardiologists.) Indeed, most doctors take money or gifts from drug companies in one way or another. Many are paid consultants, speakers at company-sponsored meetings, ghost-authors of papers written by drug companies or their agents, and ostensible "researchers" whose contribution often consists merely of putting their patients on a drug and transmitting some token information to the company. Still more doctors are recipients of free meals and other out-and-out gifts. In addition, drug companies subsidize most meetings of professional organizations and most of the continuing medical education needed by doctors to maintain their state licenses.

No one knows the total amount provided by drug companies to physicians, but I estimate from the annual reports of the top nine US drug companies that it comes to tens of billions of dollars a year. By such means, the pharmaceutical industry has gained enormous control over how doctors evaluate and use its own products. Its extensive ties to physicians, particularly senior faculty at prestigious medical schools, affect the results of research, the way medicine is practiced, and even the definition of what constitutes a disease.

In view of this control and the conflicts of interest that permeate the enterprise, it is not surprising that industry-sponsored trials published in medical journals consistently favor sponsors' drugs—largely because negative results are not published, positive results are repeatedly published in slightly different forms, and a positive spin is put on even negative results. A review of seventy-four clinical trials of antidepressants, for example, found that thirty-seven of thirty-eight positive studies were published. But of the thirty-six negative studies, thirty-three were either not published or published in a form that conveyed a positive outcome. It is not unusual for a published paper to shift the focus from the drug's intended effect to a secondary effect that seems more favorable.

Many drugs that are assumed to be effective are probably little better than placebos, but there is no way to know because negative results are hidden. One clue was provided six years ago by four researchers who, using the Freedom of Information Act, obtained FDA reviews of every placebo-controlled clinical trial submitted for initial approval of the six most widely used antidepressant drugs approved between 1987 and 1999—Prozac, Paxil, Zoloft, Celexa, Serzone, and Effexor. They found that on average, placebos were 80 percent as effective as the drugs. The difference between drug and placebo was so small that it was unlikely to be of any clinical significance. The results were much the same for all six drugs: all were equally ineffective. But because favorable results were published and unfavorable results buried (in this case, within the FDA), the public and the medical profession believed these drugs were potent antidepressants.

Clinical trials are also biased through designs for research that are chosen to yield favorable results for sponsors. For example, the sponsor's drug may be compared with another drug administered at a dose so low that the sponsor's drug looks more powerful. Or a drug that is likely to be used by older people will be tested in young people, so that side effects are less likely to emerge. A common form of bias stems from the standard practice of comparing a new drug with a placebo, when the relevant question is how it compares with an existing drug. In short, it is often possible to make clinical trials come out pretty much any way you want, which is why it's so important that investigators be truly disinterested in the outcome of their work.

In recent years, drug companies have perfected a new and highly effective method to expand their markets. Instead of promoting drugs to treat diseases, they have begun to promote diseases to fit their drugs. The strategy is to convince as many people as possible (along with their doctors, of course) that they have medical conditions that require long-term drug treatment. Sometimes called "disease-mongering," this is a focus of two new books: Melody Petersen's Our Daily Meds: How the Pharmaceutical Companies Transformed Themselves into Slick Marketing Machines and Hooked the Nation on Prescription Drugs and Christopher Lane's Shyness: How Normal Behavior Became a Sickness.

One result of the pervasive bias is that physicians learn to practice a very drug-intensive style of medicine. Even when changes in lifestyle would be more effective, doctors and their patients often believe that for every ailment and discontent there is a drug. Physicians are also led to believe that the newest, most expensive brand-name drugs are superior to older drugs or generics, even though there is seldom any evidence to that effect because sponsors do not usually compare their drugs with older drugs at equivalent doses. In addition, physicians, swayed by prestigious medical school faculty, learn to prescribe drugs for off-label uses without good evidence of effectiveness.

Read more Here

8 Comments:

At 9:19 PM, February 07, 2009 , Blogger Mahndisa S. Rigmaiden said...

02 07 09

Thanks for posting this II. Yes, I know this from personal experience. They will dope you up in a second and question when you wish to discontinue whatever type of med. Little by little we are becoming dumber and desensitized to human suffering. This is laying the foundation for a compliant, controlled society.

God help us!

 
At 5:21 AM, February 09, 2009 , Anonymous Buy Prozac said...

Prozac medicine is used to treat depression. It is also useful in bulimia nervosa obsessive-compulsive disorder, panic disorder, and premenstrual dysphonic disorder (PMDD). Visit the website for more information.

 
At 1:08 AM, March 31, 2009 , Anonymous prozac said...

The real problem isn't the pill-mongering, though this is a big part of it. The situation would not be as it is if people actually stopped being so willing to take so many pills for the slightest of problems. People are settling into a pill culture for any number of reasons, and when these pills don't work as the people believe they should, they claim that they're ineffective and are little more than over-priced placebos. http://www.prozac.bz

 
At 6:33 AM, April 08, 2012 , Blogger Ozone said...

This is a great inspiring article. I am pretty much pleased with your good work. You put really very helpful information. Keep it up. Looking to reading your next post.

Buy Colchicine Online | Buy Lipitor Online

 
At 4:14 PM, December 07, 2014 , Blogger oakleyses said...

burberry outlet online, louis vuitton outlet, oakley vault, longchamp outlet online, michael kors outlet online, true religion outlet, louis vuitton, true religion, polo ralph lauren, christian louboutin, ray ban outlet, louis vuitton outlet, michael kors outlet store, louis vuitton handbags, kate spade outlet online, christian louboutin shoes, tory burch outlet online, coach outlet, red bottom shoes, coach purses, christian louboutin outlet, longchamp handbags, coach outlet, burberry outlet online, nike air max, jordan shoes, michael kors outlet online, cheap oakley sunglasses, tiffany and co jewelry, gucci handbags, prada handbags, polo ralph lauren outlet, nike outlet, prada outlet, tiffany jewelry, michael kors outlet, oakley sunglasses, chanel handbags, longchamp outlet, ray ban sunglasses, nike air max, kate spade outlet, michael kors handbags, coach outlet store online, nike free, michael kors outlet online, louis vuitton outlet online

 
At 4:15 PM, December 07, 2014 , Blogger oakleyses said...

louis vuitton uk, sac vanessa bruno, longchamp, vans pas cher, sac louis vuitton, nike free, nike blazer pas cher, nike air max, true religion jeans, nike air max, burberry pas cher, timberland, guess pas cher, air max, ray ban pas cher, sac michael kors, longchamp pas cher, ralph lauren, michael kors canada, louis vuitton pas cher, nike roshe, air max pas cher, michael kors uk, tn pas cher, mulberry, lululemon, barbour, hermes pas cher, louis vuitton, north face, ralph lauren pas cher, nike free pas cher, nike roshe run, abercrombie and fitch, hollister, converse pas cher, nike air force, chaussure louboutin, scarpe hogan, new balance pas cher, air jordan, hollister, north face pas cher, lacoste pas cher, true religion outlet, oakley pas cher, ray ban uk

 
At 4:17 PM, December 07, 2014 , Blogger oakleyses said...

bottega veneta, hollister, canada goose outlet, insanity workout, chi flat iron, ghd, uggs outlet, asics shoes, nfl jerseys, reebok shoes, ugg soldes, valentino shoes, ugg, north face jackets, jimmy choo shoes, canada goose outlet, nike huarache, beats headphones, longchamp, canada goose, north face jackets, new balance outlet, herve leger, mcm handbags, wedding dresses, mont blanc pens, instyler ionic styler, soccer jerseys, uggs on sale, ferragamo shoes, vans outlet, mac cosmetics, ugg boots, replica watches, babyliss, abercrombie and fitch, uggs outlet, nike roshe, ugg outlet, ugg boots clearance, nike trainers, giuseppe zanotti, lululemon outlet, canada goose outlet, marc jacobs outlet, birkin bag, p90x workout, celine handbags, soccer shoes

 
At 4:23 PM, December 07, 2014 , Blogger oakleyses said...

moncler outlet, links of london uk, coach outlet, ray ban, nike air max, juicy couture outlet, pandora uk, louis vuitton canada, louboutin, juicy couture outlet, canada goose, timberland shoes, converse, thomas sabo uk, montre femme, moncler, canada goose pas cher, uggs canada, pandora jewelry, hollister, converse shoes, pandora charms, moncler, hollister canada, supra shoes, ralph lauren, ugg, canada goose, moncler, moncler, lancel, replica watches, canada goose, gucci, swarovski jewelry, moncler, hollister clothing, karen millen, air max, parajumpers outlet, iphone 6 case, wedding dress, toms outlet, oakley, baseball bats, vans, moncler outlet, swarovski uk

 

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home