"Conflict of Interest" in Journal Articles

[QUOTE]Conflict-of-interest statements made by physicians and scientists in their medical journal articles after they had been allegedly paid by pharmaceutical manufacturers as part of off-label marketing programs are often inadequate, highlighting the deficiencies in relying on author candidness and the weaknesses in some journal practices in ensuring proper disclosure, according to a study by international researchers published in this week's PLoS Medicine. ...[/QUOTE]

[url=http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/08/120807194255.htm][I]Science Daily[/I]: Conflict of interest declarations in off-label drug use inadequate, experts say[/url]

Oh, [B]PLoS [/B]again -- that's interesting.

Here we are:

[url=http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pmed.1001280][I]PLoS Medicine[/I]: Conflict of Interest Reporting by Authors Involved in Promotion of Off-Label Drug Use: An Analysis of Journal Disclosures[/url]

[QUOTE]Abstract

Background
Litigation documents reveal that pharmaceutical companies have paid physicians to promote off-label uses of their products through a number of different avenues. It is unknown whether physicians and scientists who have such conflicts of interest adequately disclose such relationships in the scientific publications they author ....[/QUOTE]

Pulls a few less punches ...

[QUOTE]Conclusions
One in seven authors identified in whistleblower complaints as involved in off-label marketing activities adequately disclosed their conflict of interest in subsequent journal publications. This is a much lower rate of adequate disclosure than has been identified in previous studies. [B]The non-disclosure patterns suggest shortcomings with authors and the rigor of journal practices.[/B][/QUOTE]

Doesn't it just?

Bias bias everywhere.

[url=http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2012/08/08/survey-finds-social-psychologists-admit-anti-conservative-bias]Survey finds that social psychologists admit to anti-conservative bias | Inside Higher Ed[/url]

As a former chemist, I worked for a pharma in drug discovery (which is just a lot of hours in the lab analyzing compounds) before switching and technical writing. I was astounded to learn of the proportion of money spent on marketing and luring physicians vs research. No big surprise there.

[QUOTE=avocadogirl;924023]I was astounded to learn of the proportion of money spent on marketing and luring physicians vs research. No big surprise there.[/QUOTE]

I heard a professor of medicine say on a podcast that if you add it up doctors are the most intensively advertised-at people on the face of the Earth. IOW, there's not that many of them in terms of numbers, but the amount of money spent on manipulating their opinions is colossal. The professor added that the painful thing is that doctors are absolute suckers for that while at the same time having an image of themselves as rational, scientific people who only make decisions based on evidence. I don't know what one could say about such colossal blindness.

i guess the pharmaceutical companies are laughing all the way to the bank.

That's why so many of us have stories about visits to the doctor that result in walking out with little slips of paper with instructions for the pharmacist written on them.

Doctors are the new lawyers.