Posts Tagged ‘Lancet’

thumbs-up_custom-ac488f7e1de30ea836a973fa44b5f231b16c6abb-s900-c85-510x350

Risks of Leukemia in Nuclear Workers More Than Double Previous Estimate

Massive study of 300,000 nuclear workers disputes nuclear industry propaganda: leukemia risk 117% higher than governments claim, low levels significant, and Linear No Threshold model confirmed.

Third, it confirms risks even at very low doses (mean = 1·1 mGy per year). Unlike the Japanese bomb survivors’ study, it observes risks at low dose rates rather than extrapolating them from high levels.

Fourth, it finds risks do not depend on dose rate thus contradicting the ICRP’s use of a Dose Rate Effectiveness Factor (DREF) which acts to reduce (by half) the ICRP’s published radiation risks…

Ionising radiation and risk of death from leukaemia and lymphoma in radiation-monitored workers (INWORKS): an international cohort study 

journal.pmed.0020138.g001

Medical Journals Are an Extension of the Marketing Arm of Pharmaceutical Companies

The evidence is strong that companies are getting the results they want, and this is especially worrisome because between two-thirds and three-quarters of the trials published in the major journals—Annals of Internal Medicine, JAMA, Lancet, and New England Journal of Medicineare funded by the industry [9].

If you missed the scathing critique by the Lancet editor go here. The scam is being exposed in publication after publication. Big Pharma buys favorable coverage, including so-called favorable “peer review.”

Examples of Methods for Pharmaceutical Companies to Get the Results They Want from Clinical Trials

  • Conduct a trial of your drug against a treatment known to be inferior.
  • Trial your drugs against too low a dose of a competitor drug.
  • Conduct a trial of your drug against too high a dose of a competitor drug (making your drug seem less toxic).
  • Conduct trials that are too small to show differences from competitor drugs.
  • Use multiple endpoints in the trial and select for publication those that give favourable results.
  • Do multicentre trials and select for publication results from centres that are favourable.
  • Conduct subgroup analyses and select for publication those that are favourable.
  • Present results that are most likely to impress—for example, reduction in relative rather than absolute risk.

fraud-728x400

“…a turn towards darkness”
Editor In Chief Of World’s Best Known Medical Journal: Half Of All The Literature Is False

“The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness.”

More: Dr. Marcia Angell, Editor in Chief of New England Journal of  Medicine:

“It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of the New England Journal of Medicine”