corner
Healthy Skepticism
Join us to help reduce harm from misleading health information.
Increase font size   Decrease font size   Print-friendly view   Print
Register Log in

Healthy Skepticism Library item: 10187

Warning: This library includes all items relevant to health product marketing that we are aware of regardless of quality. Often we do not agree with all or part of the contents.

 

Publication type: Journal Article

Watts G.
Research ethics have not 'sunk to an all time low'
BMJ 2007 May 26; 334:(7603):1079
http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/334/7603/1079-b


Abstract:

Clinical researchers working on new drugs were “cleared” last week of allowing their ethical standards to sink to an all time low, in a debate held at a conference on clinical research at the Royal College of Physicians in London.

A small majority of the audience worked in the drug industry, and although the debate was not limited to research within the industry the convincing win must have cheered those in the drug business, who feel that they have recently been under attack.

The contestants in the debate, entitled “This house believes that the ethics of clinical research have reached an all time low,” were Richard Smith, former editor of the BMJ and now executive director at UnitedHealth Europe, who argued for the motion, and Trevor Jones, former director general of the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry.

Dr Smith’s first example of unethical behaviour by researchers inside and outside . . .

 

  Healthy Skepticism on RSS   Healthy Skepticism on Facebook   Healthy Skepticism on Twitter

Please
Click to Register

(read more)

then
Click to Log in
for free access to more features of this website.

Forgot your username or password?

You are invited to
apply for membership
of Healthy Skepticism,
if you support our aims.

Pay a subscription

Support our work with a donation

Buy Healthy Skepticism T Shirts


If there is something you don't like, please tell us. If you like our work, please tell others.

Email a Friend








Cases of wilful misrepresentation are a rarity in medical advertising. For every advertisement in which nonexistent doctors are called on to testify or deliberately irrelevant references are bunched up in [fine print], you will find a hundred or more whose greatest offenses are unquestioning enthusiasm and the skill to communicate it.

The best defence the physician can muster against this kind of advertising is a healthy skepticism and a willingness, not always apparent in the past, to do his homework. He must cultivate a flair for spotting the logical loophole, the invalid clinical trial, the unreliable or meaningless testimonial, the unneeded improvement and the unlikely claim. Above all, he must develop greater resistance to the lure of the fashionable and the new.
- Pierre R. Garai (advertising executive) 1963