(MENAFNEditorial) (EMAILWIRE.COM, April 20, 2013 ) Langhorne, PA -- When Ben Goldacre's gave his speech at TEDTalk, he described the selective bias that research and publishing does which strongly favors articles that have positive outcomes. In the field of psychiatry, such bias is merely the tip of the iceberg. In many cases, the articles are not written by scientists whose names often appear on the byline. They are ghostwritten by drug company employees.
Judges are often given power to allow medical experts in product liability lawsuits against the drug companies to dig into otherwise behind-closed-doors sectors of the drug company and its available data vaults. In such areas one finds information that may be shocking to those who have not been involved or followed a liability claim.
Published articles regarding psychiatric drugs often fail to note the actual results of respective studies. For instance, after the FDA rejected an antidepressant clinical trial due to its failing to demonstrate effectiveness, the pharmaceutical company decided it best to author a paper based on the study. The difference was that it manipulated to show primarily the positive outcomes. In another example, a major journal editor went along with a drug company in its publishing an article about a benzodiazepine tranquilizer that was supposed to be effective for six weeks. Yet, the study had lasted an additional two weeks, and in those last two weeks patients had shown significant signs of addiction.
The effort to hide negative data and promote the positive is nothing new. In the 1980s, a drug company conducted an in-house review that showed an antidepressant increased suicide attempt rates by anywhere between 6-to-12 times compared to placebo. The report was brushed under the rug and remained a secret until it was discovered in a legal action years following. When the FDA was informed, the agency showed no interest in the outcome.
Unfortunately, as of yet there is no easy remedy for drug-company falsification of data when it comes to scientific reports. There has been some movement in politics but the strength of the lobbies for pharmaceutical is still stronger than the push. Unlike medical experts in product liability suits, the FDA is not required, and often does not, examine the company's data- gathering methodology.
Product liability suits have done some good to help bring accountability, but often cases are settled and incriminating facts are subsequently sealed. It is an unfortunate effect of the system of law.
About AcostaWilliams.com
Acosta & Williams (http://www.acostawilliams.com/) provides legal information and services for those seeking assistance for their claims. Receive a free quote today on Lipitor Lawsuit and learn how you can get the legal retribution you deserve.
Acosta & Williams
Customer Service
4156676545
news@postpressrelease.com This is a press release. Press release distribution and press release services by EmailWire.Com: http://www.emailwire.com/us-press-release-distribution.php. Source: EmailWire.Com
Legal Disclaimer:
MENAFN provides the information “as is” without warranty of any kind. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for the accuracy, content, images, videos, licenses, completeness, legality, or reliability of the information contained in this article. If you have any complaints or copyright issues related to this article, kindly contact the provider above.