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: 16333

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: news

Bowie C
NEJM & BMJ editors to challenge pharma conducting its own clinical trials
Pharma Times 2009 Aug 27
http://www.pharmatimes.com/WorldNews/article.aspx?id=16490


Full text:

The pharmaceutical industry faces an ethical dilemma when it conducts trials on its own drugs, Dr Jeffrey Drazen Editor in Chief of the New England Journal of Medicine and Dr Fiona Godlee, Editor in Chief of British Journal of Medicine, will argue in the world famous debating chamber at Oxford Union next month alongside Guardian Bad Science columnist Ben Goldacre.

Clinical trials are central to the success of the industry, providing the bedrock of evidence for a medicine’s use. Typically, these studies are conducted and paid for by pharma: in other words, the medicines developed by industry are tested by the industry.

But is this a conflict of interest? Is it acceptable for industry to pay for and run clinical trials of its own medicines – either for the purposes of registration or subsequent use?

Arguing in industry’s favour at the PharmaTimes’ Great Oxford Debate will be Robert Ruffolo, former R&D President of Research at Wyeth, Scott Gottlieb, former FDA senior official and a frequentWall Street Journal columnist, and Vincent Lawton, ex-Managing Director of MSD and President of the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry.

“The motion – There is an unacceptable conflict of interest when pharma conducts trials on its own drugs – hits at the heart of the way new medicines are evaluated and how the pharmaceutical industry interacts with researchers, regulators, journals and clinicians,” comments Dr Godlee.

Prof Trevor Jones CBE, who will introduce the debate, calls it a very timely and especially relevant topic to debate in the current climate of expansion of international clinical trial size and requirements. “It will be of particular interest to hear from the expert speakers how the needs of the pharmaceutical industry, regulators, academic researchers, publishers of learned journals and not least, the public, can accommodated”, he notes.

Can any scientific endeavour be run without experimental bias? Have your say by joining us on September 23 at the Oxford Union. For more details and to register your attendance go to www.pharmatimes.com/god

 

  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








Far too large a section of the treatment of disease is to-day controlled by the big manufacturing pharmacists, who have enslaved us in a plausible pseudo-science...
The blind faith which some men have in medicines illustrates too often the greatest of all human capacities - the capacity for self deception...
Some one will say, Is this all your science has to tell us? Is this the outcome of decades of good clinical work, of patient study of the disease, of anxious trial in such good faith of so many drugs? Give us back the childlike trust of the fathers in antimony and in the lancet rather than this cold nihilism. Not at all! Let us accept the truth, however unpleasant it may be, and with the death rate staring us in the face, let us not be deceived with vain fancies...
we need a stern, iconoclastic spirit which leads, not to nihilism, but to an active skepticism - not the passive skepticism, born of despair, but the active skepticism born of a knowledge that recognizes its limitations and knows full well that only in this attitude of mind can true progress be made.
- William Osler 1909