When a scientific study has findings that cast doubt on the efficacy of a drug, oftentimes the negative findings are morphed into positive ones.For example, in 2008, FDA officials analyzed a registry of 74 antidepressant trials, which included trials that were published and those that were not.The FDA's findings were then written up in an article in the So, if you just went to the published literature, it would look like 94 percent of the studies were positive, when in reality only about 50 percent were positive ... For statins, the odds that the funding company's drug will come out on top are staggering So, even if they can't make the results look good, they can often find a way to twist the conclusions so that their drug appears favorable.
Before you assume the science in medical journals is credible, let's take a look at what is going on behind the scenes of editing and publishing in medical science.
In order for scientific studies to happen, someone has to pay for them.
The top funder for any drug trial is the pharmaceutical company that makes it, since the manufacturer is most invested in "proving" how spectacular its drug is. Golomb uses the case of statins as an example, stating that all of the major statin studies have been funded exclusively by the drug industry.
Beatrice Golomb, Associate Professor of Medicine at University of California, San Diego, masterfully exposes the corruption that has metastasized like a tumor throughout the pharmaceutical and medical industries, in the video above.
If you have any doubt about drug companies being riddled with conflicts of interest, those doubts will be shattered after seeing the evidence she presents.
The corruption has become so prolific that it has literally debased medical science.
In the above linked Chicago Breaking News article, Dr.
The second-highest funder of drug studies is the National Institute of Health (NIH), which is not the group of neutral government experts you may have assumed them to be.
In fact, NIH accepts a great deal of money from Big Pharma and is deeply enmeshed with the industry. If a study does not have findings that are favorable to its product, it is unlikely it will ever make it into a journal for publication.
In contrast, studies that have favorable findings almost always make the cut.
There are simply thousands of scientific studies out there that have never been seen by you or your physician because they have been screened out by editors and reviewers who are being paid to uphold an industry agenda.