This from the Don Cooley site. -- We all have to face up to the drug corruption of legal drugs by the drug companies; It may be worse thaqt the illegal drugs!

[Guest guest]

To All

 

This is a story about the corruption of the Universities and the studies

sponsored by drug companies. It is something long known but little

discussed. This is why when you go into a research hospital - it is the

trial that is the most important. " How can I get this patient into one

of my trials so I can fill the quota and get the money " . Even patients

who have low grade curable cancers are having their lives endangered by

putting them into trials. I was told by a prominent researcher at a

well know university research hospital in prostate cancer " When a

patient comes to a research hospital he ought to expect to be put in a

trial " . We are seeing University doctors, that we regard as experts on

prostate cancer, who are participating in these kinds of things, doctors

whose names would be recognized my many on these lists.

 

We see it on the scandals of Lupron where the doctors were being given

vacations, conferences, samples (which doctors sold to the patients).

They have even paid off nurses with cash rewards who would prescribe

Lupron.

 

We have seen it in PC-SPES when it appears that they paid for doctors to

attend conferences, made them special " distributors " (and I believe gave

them PC-SPES to sell). They apparently gave stock in the company. They

furnished all of the research material and apparently paid them to do

studies and directed them what to say. Even some well know non-profits

are participating in this scandal to be.

 

What you read below is only the tip of the iceberg of what is going on

in research and trials. These are pay-offs plain and simple and it is a

wholesale corruption of the University system and its trials. Anymore I

am very careful on referring men with prostate cancer to any research

oriented University system for treatment - refer them there for a

consult but warn the patient about trials and refer them to a private

clinic for most treatments other than surgery.

 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

 

Survey finds drug company research raises suspicion

Friday, October 25, 2002 Posted: 9:42 AM EDT (1342 GMT)

 

(AP) -- The drug companies that pay for major testing of most new

medicines give the participating university researchers little or no say

in how the studies are designed and how the findings are handled, a

survey found.

 

The survey of 108 medical schools, published in Thursday's New England

Journal of Medicine, is the latest sign of growing concern about

conflicts of interest between those doing scientific research and the

pharmaceutical companies sponsoring it.

 

" What the institutions have told us is they feel almost powerless in

these contracts, " said Dr. Kevin Schulman, a Duke University Medical

Center professor who led the survey.

 

While federal agencies sponsor much early research, large-scale studies

of drugs' safety and effectiveness are usually paid for by the

manufacturers. Typically, the companies hire medical school faculty

members to carry out the studies.

 

But some scientists worry their lack of control could threaten the

integrity of research and the safety of the volunteers participating.

Among other things, pharmaceutical companies have sponsored research

that found a drug didn't work or was dangerous, then suppressed the

results.

 

Concerned about the problem, the International Committee of Medical

Journal Editors in 2001 published guidelines for research contracts

between medical schools and the pharmaceutical industry.

 

Last winter, researchers at Duke University Medical Center and Duke's

law school interviewed officials at U.S. medical schools and reviewed

some of their research contracts to determine how many complied with the

new guidelines. Only a minority did.

 

Schulman said researchers have less and less control over patient trials

as more and more studies include dozens of medical centers, rather than

just one, a strategy meant to bring results faster.

 

Among the study's findings:

 

Researchers rarely were allowed a say in the design of the clinical

trials, with only 10 percent of contracts covering how data is collected

and monitored and only 5 percent covering how data is analyzed and

interpreted.

 

Less than 1 percent of contracts guaranteed that results would be

published and that an independent committee would have control over

that. But 40 percent of contracts addressed editorial control of

manuscripts.

 

Only 1 percent of contracts required an independent board to monitor

patient safety. Such boards can stop a study early if the treatment is

found to be harming participants.

 

" It is very worrying, " said Mary Ann Baily, associate for ethics and

health policy at the Hastings Center, a Garrison, New York, think tank.

" The future of research and patient welfare does depend on how we

approach this. "

 

Financial ties between academic researchers and industry sponsors

already are under scrutiny for apparent conflicts of interest, as when

researchers receive stock in a company testing an experimental drug.

 

Over the summer, the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of

America established voluntary guidelines for clinical research, but they

are " basically toothless, " said Dr. Jeffrey M. Drazen, editor of the New

England Journal.

 

" The system would be better served if there were universally accepted

contractual language, " he wrote in an editorial.

 

PhRMA spokesman Jeff Trewhitt said its member companies three weeks ago

started implementing new principles for operating and reporting on

clinical trials that " reaffirm our commitment to the safety of research

participants and a timely communication of research results. "

 

Trewhitt said those principles cover at least some of the concerns

raised in the study and recommend paying researchers in cash, not

company stock.

 

In another opinion piece, doctors wrote that such protections are

critical because future medical research will depend even more closely

on partnerships between universities and industry; they suggested

creating a national panel to deal with conflict-of-interest issues.

 

A third opinion piece by doctors and an industry consultant said

universities must set firm policies protecting their researchers from

financial influences.

 

 

Don

Order your " Prostate-Help CD-ROM " at

http://www.cooleyville.com/cancer/cacdrom.htm

Prostate-Help Web Site, Aubrey's latest book on PCa,

Dr. Myers Prostate Forums, and more all included.

Don Cooley, call 408 268-6400 if I can help!

Web site - http://prostate-help.com

 

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~ NOTE TO GROUP MEMBERS: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~

SAVE SPACE - when you REPLY, please eliminate unnecessary

repetition of the posts and delete all of this footer material.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

1. The Guidelines for being a member and posting to this group

can be found at: http://www.phcagroups.org/grwelcom.htm

By being a member you confirm that you have read and

understand these Guidelines/Rules.

2. Every post that is made to this group is by definition covered

under the Fair Use clause of the Copyright law as explained at

http://www.phcagroups.org/grphcopy.htm and is part of this post.

3. FOR ASSISTANCE with your subscription status:

newsletter-admin

4. To SELF-MANAGE your subscription status:

http://lists.phcagroups.org/mailman/listinfo/newsletter

5. SUBSCRIBE to other Prostate-Help groups at:

http://www.phcagroups.org/grsubsc.htm

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

 

---

Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).

Version: 6.0.417 / Virus Database: 233 - Release 11/8/02