Most scientists who published articles supporting GlaxoSmithKline Plc’s diabetes drug Avandia after it was linked to heart disease in 2007, had financial ties to the company, according to a Mayo Clinic report.
The Mayo researchers examined more than 200 articles that appeared after an analysis in the New England Journal of Medicine linked Avandia to a 43% increased risk of heart attacks, and a subsequent clinical trial found no greater danger of heart disease. Almost 90% of scientists who wrote positive articles, reviews or commentaries about Avandia had financial ties to London-based Glaxo, the study published in the British Medical Journal found.
Almost 75% authors who were of negative views of the drug had no financial ties to Glaxo, while just 6% of those with positive views of the drug received no fund or fees from Glaxo. The relationships between scientists and pharmaceutical companies may help explain why the interpretations of the published articles varied so widely. About half the articles carried conflict of interest statements.
Does this suggest that even the scientific records also are not trustworthy. Shockingly, the answer is YES. Glaxo is a company, aim of which is profit anyhow, but what about the scientists? A Glaxo spokeswoman said the company posts information and results from all its clinical trials on its Web site. Glaxo will disclose all the research payments it makes to investigators and their institutions in the U.S. starting this year, spokeswoman said.
No comments:
Post a Comment