Psychiatric Drug Facts via :

“Most psychiatric drugs can cause withdrawal reactions, sometimes including life-threatening emotional and physical withdrawal problems… Withdrawal from psychiatric drugs should be done carefully under experienced clinical supervision.” Dr. Peter Breggin

Jul 29, 2011

Useless Studies, Real Harm

Carl Elliott teaches bioethics at the University of Minnesota and is the author of “White Coat, Black Hat: Adventures on the Dark Side of Medicine,” has an Op-Ed post in the today's New York Times. Professor Elliot offers insight into the lack of Human Research Protection for participants in research, paritcularly in"seeding trials." These "seeding trials" he explains, are used as a marketing tactic; they are not drug trials that are conducted not to advance research, but are conducted solely for the purpose of increasing the market for the particular drug which is being trialed.
a couple of excerpts:"How can studies that endanger human subjects attract so little scrutiny? Forty years ago, when most clinical research took place in academic settings, the main dangers to research subjects came in service to genuine scientific aims. A large regulatory apparatus was developed to protect human subjects from the ambitions of overweening academic researchers. In the early 1990s, however, pharmaceutical companies realized that it was faster and less expensive to conduct trials in the private sector, where the driving force is not knowledge, but profit. And the regulatory apparatus designed for the old era has proved woefully inadequate for the new one.
"The main source of protection for research subjects is a patchwork system of ethics committees known as institutional review boards, or I.R.B.’s. These are small, federally empowered bodies that review research proposals before they are carried out, to ensure that the studies are ethically sound. But they don’t typically pass judgment on whether a study is being carried out merely to market a drug. Nor do most I.R.B.’s have the requisite expertise to do so. Even worse, many I.R.B.’s are now themselves for-profit businesses, paid directly by the sponsors of the studies they evaluate. If one I.R.B. gets a reputation for being too strict, a pharmaceutical company can simply go elsewhere for its review." (emphasis mine) here 
I would only add that I.R.B's not only lack expertise, but seem to also lack familiarity with or understanding of the Nuremberg Code


Focus Group Advocate said...

It does not make any sense to conduct trials on Humans just to make profit.

Unknown said...

No it does not. I am sure that is why it is unethical, and also one of the reasons that the the Nuremburg Code was written and adopted after the horrors of WWII.


Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

FAIR USE NOTICE: This may contain copyrighted
(C) material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available for educational purposes, to advance understanding of human rights, democracy, scientific, moral, ethical, and social justice issues, etc. It is believed that this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 of the US Copyright Law. This material is distributed without profit.