The Medical Mafia rules:
OK to use and promote untested and toxic drugs and medical procedures
Not OK for generally safe and efficacious natural foods and/or vitamins!
..."Only 6% of drug advertising material is supported by evidence...
...The article lists several examples of misrepresentation: medical guidelines from scientific societies are misquoted or changed, the side effects of drugs are minimised, groups of patient are wrongly defined, study results are suppressed, treatment effects are exaggerated, risks are manipulated, and effects of drugs were drawn from animal studies."....
...The authors warn that such a high amount of misinformation puts patients health at risk."...
Of course our regulatory bodies like Health Canada and their ilk look the other way. Gee wiz I wonder why?
Guess who likes, influences and supports our regulatory bodies to enforce these rules?
With friends like these who needs enemies?
See also: Myth in pharmaceutical advertising ads .
Another example why sickness - whoops! "health" care is the fastest growing failing business....- CW
British Medical Journal 2004;328:485 (28 February), doi:10.1136/bmj.328.7438.485-a
Only 6% of drug advertising material is supported by evidence
Heidelberg Annette Tuffs
A new study of the advertising material and marketing brochures sent out by drug companies to GPs in Germany has shown that about 94% of the information in them has no basis in scientific evidence.
The study, carried out by the Institute for Evidence-Based Medicine, a private independent research institute in Cologne, evaluated 175 brochures containing information on 520 drugs, which were either sent by post or handed out to 43 GPs since last June. The study was published in this months issue of the drugs bulletin Arznei Telegramm (2004;35:21-www.di-em.de/data/at_2004_35_21.pdf).
About 15% of the brochures did not contain any citations, while the citations listed in another 22% could not be found. In the remaining 63% the information was mostly correctly connected with the relevant research articles but did not reflect their results. Only 6% of the brochures contained statements that were scientifically supported by identifiable literature.
The evaluation was done by two specially trained and independently acting reviewers. In cases of doubt a third reviewer was involved.
"This is the first study in Germany evaluating the quality of drug advertising material," says Thomas Kaiser, a scientist at the institute who published the study together with Peter Sawicki and other colleagues.
He points out that the advertising material presents distorted images of the drugs profiles. The article lists several examples of misrepresentation: medical guidelines from scientific societies are misquoted or changed, the side effects of drugs are minimised, groups of patient are wrongly defined, study results are suppressed, treatment effects are exaggerated, risks are manipulated, and effects of drugs were drawn from animal studies.
The authors warn that such a high amount of misinformation puts patients health at risk. Studies from other countries have shown that doctors tend to base their decisions on the information and advertising material sent out by drug companies. Therefore, the authors conclude, an independent institution should be established to monitor the content of such material.
The German drug industry has decided to tighten the rules in its self regulatory code on relations between the industry and the medical profession with regard to cooperation in clinical studies and attendance at conferences that are funded by drug companies.
The German Association of Research Based Pharmaceutical Companies in Berlin announced that its members have set up an independent tribunal in Berlin. Members of the tribunal will be chosen by drug companies and doctors and patients groups but will not be elected representatives of those bodies. Like a court, the tribunal will be able to punish companies that break the rules, imposing fines of up to 50 000 (£34 000; $63 000) or, in the case of a second offence, up to 250 000. Anyone will be allowed to notify the tribunal of possible offences.
The initiative was the industrys reaction to the German governments threat to install an executive against corruption. Doctors associations have also tightened their rules on corruption.
More information about the Institute for Evidence-Based Medicine can be found on its website, www.di-em.de/z_index.htm
posted by Chris Gupta on Monday March 15 2004
updated on Thursday March 29 2007
URL of this article:
Drinking Water Fluoridation is Genotoxic & Teratogenic
This paper by Prof. Joe Cummins is a very important 5 minute delegation made to London Ontario Canada "Civic Works Committee" public participation meeting on January 25, 2012 on fluoride*. While a bit technical it is short and easy to grasp. A must read as it goes to the heart of the matter regarding the well established toxicity of fluoride which is well in all scientific circles even before water... [read more]
February 06, 2012 - Chris Gupta
Democracy At Work? - PPM On Fluoride
Here is a commentary on the recent (Jan, 25th, 2011) Public Participation Meeting (PPM) on Fluoride in the City of London, Ontario. The meeting started with a strong pro fluoride stance form the City engineer. His lack of knowledge on chemistry of the toxic wastes used to fluoridate water could embarrass even a high school student never mind his own profession. He blatantly violated his "duty to public welfare" as... [read more]
January 29, 2012 - Chris Gupta
"Evidence Be Damned...Patient Outcome Is Irrelevant" - From Helke
Further to The Future of Complementary/Integrative Medicine & Patient Choice, here is an important must read and act note from Helke Ferrie, a superb Medical Science Writer and Publisher. Now that the true colours of the well known shortcomings of allopathic medicine are being discovered en mass, the screws are being tightened by the pharmaceutical masters on their medical puppets. It seems that they are prepared to stop at nothing.... [read more]
September 16, 2011 - Chris Gupta