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: 527

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

Rennie D.
Thyroid storm.
JAMA 1997 Apr 16; 277:(15):1238-43

Keywords:
*editorial United States drug company sponsored research conflict of interest academic freedom relationship between researchers, academic institutions and industry Betty Dong Synthroid Boots Knoll American Thyroid Association PROMOTION DISGUISED: CLINICAL TRIALS PROMOTION DISGUISED: DISINFORMATION AND HARASSMENT SPONSORSHIP: RESEARCH


Notes:

This editorial recounts the story of how Boots Pharmaceuticals, makers of Synthroid (thyroid replacement) contracted with Betty Dong, a researcher at the University of California-San Francisco, to undertake a study to show that generic forms of Synthroid were not bioequivalent to it. When Dong’s study showed otherwise Boots stopped publication of the article and threatened to sue her for contract violation. The editorial discusses all of the ramifications of this event.

 

  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