Big Pharma Fraud

5 posts / 0 new
Last post
V's picture
V
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Dec 14 2009
Posts: 849
Big Pharma Fraud

Greetings

I just read this and since medical care is in the news I thought it might be useful to look at some of the players in the game. Obama has cut a deal with big pharma to get their support for his proposal. They support it and the government makes it illegal for American citizens  to get drugs from other countries.

Another thing that caught my attention about this article was that it involved Pfizer. I believe the owner of this site was an executive of that company so it might be interesting to get his take on this.

Also a well respected peer reviewed  journal was forced to retract 10 articles. So much for peer reviewed articles, I guess.

V

Big Pharma researcher admits to faking dozens of research studies for Pfizer, Merck

Mike Adams
Natural News
February 18, 2010

It’s being called the largest research fraud in medical history. Dr. Scott Reuben, a former member of Pfizer’s speakers’ bureau, has agreed to plead guilty to faking dozens of research studies that were published in medical journals.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Scott Rueben.

 

 

Now being reported across the mainstream media is the fact that Dr. Reuben accepted a $75,000 grant from Pfizer to study Celebrex in 2005. His research, which was published in a medical journal, has since been quoted by hundreds of other doctors and researchers as “proof” that Celebrex helped reduce pain during post-surgical recovery. There’s only one problem with all this: No patients were ever enrolled in the study!

Dr. Scott Reuben, it turns out, faked the entire study and got it published anyway.

It wasn’t the first study faked by Dr. Reuben: He also faked study data on Bextra and Vioxx drugs, reports the Wall Street Journal.

As a result of Dr. Reuben’s faked studies, the peer-reviewed medical journal Anesthesia & Analgesia was forced to retract 10 “scientific” papers authored by Reuben. The Day of London reports that 21 articles written by Dr. Reuben that appear inmedical journals have apparently been fabricated, too, and must be retracted.

After being caught fabricating research for Big Pharma, Dr. Reuben has reportedly signed a plea agreement that will require him to return $420,000 that he received from drug companies. He also faces up to a 10-year prison sentence and a $250,000 fine.

He was also fired from his job at the Baystate Medical Center in Springfield , Mass. after an internal audit there found that Dr. Reuben had been faking research data for 13 years. (http://www.theday.com/article/20100…)

Business as usual in Big Pharma

What’s notable about this story is not the fact that a medical researcher faked clinical trials for the pharmaceutical industry. It’s not the fact that so-called “scientific” medical journals published his fabricated studies. It’s not even the fact that the drug companies paid this quack close to half a million dollars while he kept on pumping out fabricated research.

The real story here is that this is business as usual in the pharmaceutical industry.

Dr. Reuben’s actions really aren’t that extraordinary. Drug companies bribe researchers and doctors as a routine matter. Medical journals routinely publish false, fraudulent studies. FDA panel members regularly rely on falsified research in making their drug approval decisions, and the mainstream media regularly quotes falsified research in reporting the news.

Fraudulent research, in other words, is widespread in modern medicine. The pharmaceutical industry couldn’t operate without it, actually. It is falsified research that gives the industry its best marketing claims and strongest FDA approvals.Quacks like Dr Scott Reuben are an important part of the pharmaceutical profit machine because without falsified research, bribery and corruption, the industry would have very little research at all.

Pay special attention to the fact that the Anesthesia & Analgesia medical journal gladly published Dr. Reuben’s faked studies even though this journal claims to be a “scientific” medical journal based on peer review. Funny, isn’t it, how such a scientific medical journal gladly publishes fraudulent research with data that was simply invented by the study author. Perhaps these medical journals should be moved out of the non-fiction section of university libraries and placed under science fiction.

Remember, too, that all the proponents of pharmaceuticals, vaccines and mammograms ignorantly claim that theirconventional medicine is all based on “good science.” It’s all scientific and trustworthy, they claim, while accusing alternative medicine of being “woo woo” wishful thinking and non-scientific hype. Perhaps they should have a quick look in the mirror and realize it is their own system of quack medicine that’s based largely on fraudulent research, bribery and corruption.

 

 

 

 

Morpheus's picture
Morpheus
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Dec 27 2008
Posts: 1200
Re: Big Pharma Fraud

Old news my friend. 

Subprime JD's picture
Subprime JD
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Feb 17 2009
Posts: 562
Re: Big Pharma Fraud

More and more fraud.

SteveW's picture
SteveW
Status: Gold Member (Offline)
Joined: Jan 21 2010
Posts: 490
Re: Big Pharma Fraud
V wrote:

Dr. Reuben’s actions really aren’t that extraordinary. Drug companies bribe researchers and doctors as a routine matter. Medical journals routinely publish false, fraudulent studies. FDA panel members regularly rely on falsified research in making their drug approval decisions, and the mainstream media regularly quotes falsified research in reporting the news.

Obviously its a problem. Drug companies want to use independent non-in house research and to selectively publish studies that substantiate the value of a drug while ignoring studies that negate the drug's value. Researchers are not bribed per se but there is a strong relationship between useful results and subsequent funding. I believe incidents such as this one where the results are entirely fraudulent and completely fictional are rare while the clever use of statistical analysis is more common.

I'm not an expert in this area but I do know that if the fictional findings seem reasonable and are in accord with previous studies then there is no reason for the peer reviewers to suspect problems with the data, particularly if the researcher is respected and from a well regarded institution.

It seems that Dr. Reuben reported on the efficacy of Celebrex(TM) and Vioxx(TM) compared with other NSAID's such as Ibuprofen. These studies were not part of the FDA or European Union's approval process.

If these drugs had not been associated with potentially an increased risk of heart attack and so come under increased scutiny then he may well have been able to continue his charade.

The medical community is aware of this general poroblem and in the last few years major journals, such as the Lancet and New England Journal of Medicine have required researchers to file a research protocol prior to their study as a condition of publication. This ensures that negative findings will not simply be forgotten.

BTW: What does this have to do with the aims of this site? Just wondering.

 

 

 

 

DrKrbyLuv's picture
DrKrbyLuv
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 10 2008
Posts: 1995
Re: Big Pharma Fraud

Hello V, thanks for this update.  It seems everything has been corrupted - politics, the media, the economy, morality and science.

The overwhelming common denominator is a consolidation whereby a relatively few companies conspire to monopolize their industries.

Larry

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Login or Register to post comments