[NewsTarget] JAMA Refuses to Ban Authors Who Hide Financial Ties to Drug Co's

[Guest guest]

I appreciate JAMA's honesty. Now at least we know, clearly, where

we stand. Nothing like the present, in the face of these facts, to

re-evaluate our stance on allopathic, also known as conventional,

medicine in the role of our health.

 

Other Comments?

Misty L. Trepke

www..com

 

ps- If organized medicine is not really serving our interests but

their own, should we be asking ourselves if there aren't other

organized institutions that similarly are not serving us as they

claim, but really themselves instead? How many more are there?

 

 

http://www.newstarget.com/019914.html

 

JAMA refuses to exclude authors who hide financial ties to drug

companies

 

 

(NewsTarget) The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA)

said today that it would not ban authors who fail to disclose

financial ties to drug companies, because such an action might bring

antitrust lawsuits.

 

Catherine DeAngelis, editor-in-chief of JAMA, says after speaking

with lawyers, she and other medical journal editors have decided not

to risk being sued by pharmaceutical companies for antitrust by

banning authors with financial conflicts of interest.

 

DeAngelis rejected calls for JAMA to outright ban authors who have

not revealed financial links to drug makers, saying that such an

action " would only encourage that author to send his or her articles

to another journal; it cleans our house by messing others. "

 

Though DeAngelis claims antitrust issues would arise if all medical

journals banned authors who refuse disclosure, former Federal Trade

Commission lawyer and current Penn State law professor Stephen Ross

says nothing would prevent JAMA and other journals from sharing the

names of authors who have refused disclosure. " They could even

jointly observe that particular journals published a certain

researcher, " Ross says.

 

" This is classic behavior characteristic of the incestuous

relationship between medical journals and drug companies, " said Mike

Adams, a frequent critic of pharmaceutical industry practices. " With

this announcement, the American Medical Association is openly

declaring its unwillingness to meet even the most basic standards of

journalistic integrity. "

 

JAMA recently corrected two previously published studies to include

information on the researchers' or authors' formerly undisclosed

financial ties. In a study linking migraines with heart disease,

JAMA issued a correction saying that all of the study's six authors

had dies to drug companies that make migraine or heart disease

drugs. In a correction of a February study on depression, JAMA

informed readers that more than half the study's authors had been

paid as speakers or consultants for makers of antidepressants.

Related book:

Take Back Your Health Power! How to reclaim your natural health

power from the doctors, drug companies and food marketers who have

stolen your right to be healthy

This courageous report tells you how to take back your power from

those who have been exploiting your misfortune for their profit.

Learn how to put yourself in control and transform your health

outcome from this day forward.

Critics of JAMA's refusal to ban such authors say that medical

journals have failed to abide by fundamental standards of integrity

and protect the health of Americans whose lives are affected by

allowing such authors to be published. Moreover, simply giving up

and allowing such authors to be published -- instead of trying to

remedy a serious problem -- indicates how corrupt U.S. medical

journals have become.

" It is difficult to find a clearer example of the collusion between

Big Pharma and JAMA than this astonishing announcement which says,

essentially, 'We refuse to operate with scientific integrity,' "

Adams added. " Today, JAMA has designated itself the official

propaganda mouthpiece of Big Pharma, something that independent

observers have known for years. "

 

###