ago For some time we read in the newspaper El Pais article by the Advocate reader Milagros Pérez Oliva. Is this a weekly newspaper, which includes criticism or suggestions from readers on the same day. We recognize that we like to read regularly and which we see now in this post certainly impressed us as you will be with you if you come to the end (we know that the tickets are long, what can we do ...). But unfortunately, as we have said before, we were impressed but not surprised ... Andaman cured of ghosts ...
entries in the chamber to be published on the single psychosis of Bartolome Llopis on ethics in Stoic philosophy and its relation to Lacanian psychoanalysis or the conceptual definition of delirium , from a deconstructive analysis the same as the parameters of the DSM-IV ... And I swear it's true.
But remember an old joke about Mafalda, where he saw her (or was it Mickey?) Asking a worker who worked in a hole in the ground: you looking for happiness? And he answered: No, honey, a gas leak ... Mafalda (definitely a she) walked away thinking: as always, the urgent does not leave time for what matters. And that happens to us, which we have been feeling some choking the continued presence of the pharmaceutical industry and their minions in our working environment makes us feel the need tickets like this while the other would be a lot prettier (anyway, if we end up falling hack before the blog page ...).
And then article Mercedes Pérez Oliva, who is worth it:
often arrive in the newsroom studies and apparently rigorous and reliable data, however, may mislead readers or hide advertising or commercial interests. Discovering and avoidance is a duty of rigorous journalism. Who, doctors and patients still have to deal with chronic pain, must have felt a great relief to read that "in the last European Congress of Pain, held in Lisbon, was presented tapentadol (...), the first analgesic that appears in 25 years of a new generation that will mark a before and after ", and" the experts said in Lisbon that begins a new era in the management of difficult acute and chronic pain. " I said Mayka Sanchez COUNTRY contributor to health issues in the article "Pain as the fifth vital sign," published Dec. 22 in Society. Described in the same unfortunate situation: "Despite nine million English chronic pain, only 10% of primary care physicians used measurement scales for better therapeutic approach, an issue that causes up to half of the cases, the pain may become a symptom badly treated ". The conclusion was clear: most doctors do not act properly and most poorly treated patients. To alleviate this situation had arisen Painless Platform, an initiative whose goal was to "sensitize" the doctors and the society " with medical advances, pain can and should be monitored.
Doctors called the Ombudsman to complain about being given such a bad image of your work without citing the source of statistics. But one of them, Enrique Gavilán, Plasencia, saw something else: "I have been searching the main database of scientific studies, the U.S. PubMed bookstore, I reviewed the studies that have been published about this new drug and believe me, the results show that it is far superior to placebo and in any case is very similar in effectiveness to others that there is a lot more clinical experience and its price, I suspect, be much lower. " In its letter to the Ombudsman asked to investigate whether it is a case of surreptitious advertising and conflict of interest.
Mayka Sanchez clarified that the data are drawn from the Guide to Good Clinical Practice in Pain and its assessment of tapentadol is based on the statements made by Anthony Dickenson, one of the specialists who participated in clinical trials at the congress of the European Association for the Study of Pain, held in Lisbon, which she attended. The drug, he says, is supported by "177 articles published in international journals and conferences, all equipped with" an editorial and scientific committee which monitors the accuracy, objectivity and quality of work presented. "To Mayka Sanchez, suspected of surreptitious advertising referred to Dr. Hawk" is a very subjective opinion and not based on the published text, "as he says, are only talking of one of the molecules presented in Lisbon, not to mention your business name. The Advocate, this explanation does not seem enough. All studies on new drugs, including those quoted on the tapentadol Mayka Sánchez, are funded by vaccine manufacturers and sometimes the Congress in presented. On the biases in clinical research and the publication of the results there is ample scientific literature. The work of a journalist is to verify information and avoid bias on the part it may contain.
Was justified introducing this drug as a breakthrough drug "before and after" or "new era" in the treatment of pain? To clarify the professors I consulted Xavier Carner, president of the Drug Evaluation Committee of the English Medicines Agency, and Rafael Maldonado, a researcher at the University Pompeu Fabra working for the National Institutes of Health, USA. Neither considers the drug to be a novelty. Even the laboratory that produced it goes so far as Mayka Sánchez. In the press release in its submission in June states that "shows comparable efficacy to opioids classic" but offers "a more favorable tolerability profile." Nor is new: it has the same mechanism of action tramadol, the same laboratory.
But there is only a matter of exaggeration. The way information is presented justify the suspicions of Dr. Hawk, because it conceals all content comes from a single source, and omitted to disclose that source is, ultimately, the drug manufacturer name . Quote Grünenthal the Foundation of the Platform as driving without pain, but does not say that it belongs to the laboratory Grünenthal Pharma specializes in analgesic therapy, which is funding the campaign platform and the measurement of pain. The report also clarifies that the drug presents a revolutionary part of this laboratory . Only readers already know that lab can guess the relationship.
The information is dangerously scheme of new pharmaceutical strategies used to promote the prescription of drugs, after eradication the outrageous incentives that reward doctors. In fact, doctors are no longer the sole objective of the marketing departments of the laboratories. Now try to influence prescribing by patients themselves. That strategy is to bring out (sometimes even creating) a health problem, mobilizing scientific leaders and if possible, patients with the aim of "raising awareness" about the problem which has the solution .
Given the suspicion with which information is received from the industry, it has been forced to seek indirect forms and greater authority to vehicular activity. For this have created foundations and platforms theoretically independent and nonprofit, composed of academics and specialists, but funded by the industry itself .
All this is present in this case. The report begins by describing the serious problem of pain, based on studies funded by industry, presents to the platform that will fight against this scourge, saying that it is promoted and funded by the lab, and just reporting a drug that appears as revolutionary without saying that it is the same laboratory . For sake of completeness, the holder of the report coincides with the central slogan of the campaign funded by Grünenthal . And not even a novel information, as the very Mayka Sanchez had published three months before the same theme in El País Semanal. The only new thing was the reference to the drug. The report cites the Lisbon conference but does not mention that Mayka Sanchez traveled to the capital invited by the laboratory lusa . Style Book Country establishes the subject: "The newspaper, as a rule, does not accept invitations for processing information. Exceptions will expressly be authorized by management. In the information made after accepting an invitation shall state that the trip has been sponsored.
Over all, the deputy director responsible for Society, Bern González Harbour, said: "The newspaper is becoming the target of a massive flood of reports and studies, many of them partly filled with interesting conclusions at first glance but they lose their legitimacy in the interest checks from its own promoter. Our task is to analyze, identify and submit all the most scrutiny, and filter and publish only what is truly contrasted and objective that is of interest to our readers. The controls have not worked in this case and apologize. This article is an example of what not to do .
far article, emphasis added, repentance and apology from the newspaper and need to reflect, we believe, is all ...
0 comments:
Post a Comment