Poll: Belief in pseudoscience/paranormal phenomena

If you read the rest of my posts, Topher, you would understand that I clearly do not imply that. But then, you might have to admit that some of these modalities actually do have scientific support, now wouldn't you?
 
Of course. If medical evidence supports a specific CAM claim - which would make it a scientific medicine - I'll happily endorse it.
 
If that's the case then you've got the worst case of diarrhea of the mouth I've ever seen. To state something that simple as you claim.... it sure took you a whole lot of typing to arrive at that.
 
Umm ... a YouTube link. Ok.

The important thing about astrology is that astrologers recognised that there was a correlation between the Earths relative position to things like the sun and the moon and the planets and the seasons of the years and behaviours of both people and animals.

Yes there is a lot of myth and mysticism that comes with astrology. But then again there's very little from medieval times that isn't shrouded in mysticism.


ESP is the ability to perceive the world beyond our normal 5 senses. If a human being could see the polarised light from stars or was sensative to minute changes in the Earths gravitational field I would say that went beyond our 5 normal senses.

The point being it is perfectly possible the perceive the world in a way beyond what we as human beings consider to be normal without having to believe in any sort of far fetched mumbo-jumbo.
 
There is no such correlation between the planets and the behaviour of people. Again, this is disproved by twins. If the behaviour of people is influenced/dictated by position of the planets at birth then we should see such a correlation with twins, yet this is not the case.

Do know of any positive conclusive studies? I don’t.

Astrology is not merely that the planets have some kind of effect on Earth, it is that our lives are influenced by positions of the planets, which is complete nonsense.

The only effect a planet can possibly have is gravity, and light, yet as Sagan said in the video, at the delivery room, the gravitational effect of the obstetrician is greater than Mars!


Right, humans. Not scorpions. The fact that the senses of animals have evolved diffrently does not prove ESP.
 
I think you need to distingish medical herbalist and new age herbalists.
Medical herbalism uses the same active ingredients used in modern medicines but just in their natural state. The theory being that it may be easier to absorb into the body. The BS comes in when you say things like rhino horn will make you more of a MAN.

The Bear.
 
I suggest you perhaps do a bit more research; maybe something a tad less biased than the "New England Skeptics' Society", like, oh, I don't know, JAMA? I posted a link to it. I trust that over this skeptic stuff any day of the week. At least JAMA is peer-reviewed by medical professionals I can trust and who aren't afraid to be objective without an agenda.
 
Prehaps you misread. I am arguing against mainstream Chiropractic, not scientific Chiropractic.

Oh, by the way, and that link was an interview with a Chiropractor! Yeah, I guess if you wish to be bias the first thing you do if talk to the people within the profession you are sceptical of! How bias of them!
 
TKDMitch
Sorry I have been away a bit, but in response to your post:

1) Here is some quick salary numbers for you:
http://www.explorehealthcareers.org/en/Career.17.aspx
This is the average salary of a MD beginning at $150,000-300,000, this does not include specialists or surgeons or others that work in hospital settings.

http://www.explorehealthcareers.org/en/Career.84.aspx
This is a list for OMDs or oriental medicine doctors, with an average of $30,000-150,000 so our income tops out at where theirs starts. To me this is not very lucrative to add to your practice.

I also noticed you are writing from the UK, while I cannot comment on the kind of medical care over there, in the US we are having some big difficulties with people getting proper care. While I was not able to find numbers to support what I have seen being a student/practitioner, I can say that an average cost of visiting an acupuncturist is about $75 for an 1 and half hour session (typically). Where as an average visit for an MD is anywhere from $300-1500 (depending on tests etc. that are done) for about a half hour visit.

I know of one western MD that does not have a degree in Acupuncture (our degree is a 3000 hour accredited program that includes western tx. modalities as well, where as a western MD does not need ANY hours to use chinese medicine) that charges $250 for a 20 minute acupuncture treatment. Which is a far cry above our average of $75 per 1 1/2 hour treatment. So there are "legit and knowledgable" people out there that are actually taking advantage of acupuncture and "taking their piece of the pie"


2)
http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/search...ext=acupuncture
You have yet to comment on Domino finding the articles as well as others that have been researched in the Journal of the American Medical Association. I know they did not come through if you were not a subscriber so here are a few others.

http://www.medicinenet.com/pain_management_musculoskeletal_pain/article.htm
(one of the treatment modalities it suggest in the article is indeed acupuncture)
http://www.medicinenet.com/cluster_headaches/article.htm
(again mentioning that some people have been helped by alternative practices, chiropractic, acupuncture)

Since I have found that many don't go to these links during these kind of discussions here is the NIH's (National Institute of Health US) article on acupuncture:
What is acupuncture?

Acupuncture is a component of the health care system of China that can be traced back at least 2,500 years. The general theory of acupuncture is based on the premise that there are patterns of energy flow (Qi) through the body that are essential for health. Disruptions of this flow are believed to be responsible for disease. Acupuncture may, it has been theorized, correct imbalances of flow at identifiable points close to the skin.

The practice of acupuncture to treat identifiable pathophysiological (disease) conditions in American medicine was rare until the visit of President Richard M. Nixon to China in 1972. Since that time, there has been an explosion of interest in the United States and Europe in the application of the technique of acupuncture to Western medicine.

Acupuncture is a family of procedures involving stimulation of anatomical locations on or in the skin by a variety of techniques. There are a variety of approaches to diagnosis and treatment in American acupuncture that incorporate medical traditions from China, Japan, Korea, and other countries. The most thoroughly studied mechanism of stimulation of acupuncture points employs penetration of the skin by thin, solid, metallic needles, which are manipulated manually or by electrical stimulation.

Are there standards for acupuncture needles?

After reviewing the existing body of knowledge, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) removed acupuncture needles from the category of "experimental medical devices." The FDA now regulates acupuncture needles, just as it does other devices such as surgical scalpels and hypodermic syringes, under good manufacturing practices and single-use standards of sterility.

What are the possible side effects of acupuncture?

The most common serious injury reported from the needles of acupuncture has been accidental puncture of the lung. This results in a partial collapse of the lung called pneumothorax. The most common infection reported from acupuncture treatments is viral hepatitis, a potentially serious infection of the liver. Other side effects include bacterial infections locally at the site of needle insertion in the skin and elsewhere in the body. Generally, side effects seem to relate to poor hygiene and training of the acupuncturist.

For what conditions has acupuncture treatment been found helpful?

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) Consensus Development Program was established in 1977 and is designed to assess health technology. The program organizes major conferences that produce consensus statements and technology assessment statements on controversial issues in medicine important to health care providers, patients, and the general public. The following statement is from the NIH Consensus Development Statement on Acupuncture on November 3-5, 1997.

Acupuncture as a therapeutic intervention is widely practiced in the United States. There have been many studies of its potential usefulness. However, many of these studies provide equivocal results because of design, sample size, and other factors. The issue is further complicated by inherent difficulties in the use of appropriate controls, such as placebo and sham acupuncture groups.

However, promising results have emerged, for example, efficacy of acupuncture in adult post-operative and chemotherapy nausea and vomiting and in post-operative dental pain. There are other situations such as addiction, stroke rehabilitation, headache, menstrual cramps, tennis elbow, fibromyalgia, myofascial pain, osteoarthritis, low back pain, carpal tunnel syndrome, and asthma where acupuncture may be useful as an adjunct treatment or an acceptable alternative or be included in a comprehensive management program.

Findings from basic research have begun to elucidate the mechanisms of action of acupuncture, including the release of opioids and other peptides in the central nervous system and the periphery and changes in neuroendocrine function. Although much needs to be accomplished, the emergence of plausible mechanisms for the therapeutic effects of acupuncture is encouraging.

The introduction of acupuncture into the choice of treatment modalities that are readily available to the public is in its early stages. Issues of training, licensure, and reimbursement remain to be clarified. There is sufficient evidence, however, of acupuncture's value to expand its use into conventional medicine and to encourage further studies of its physiology and clinical value. This statement is representative of the opinions of current standard medical practice.

How does acupuncture work?

Here are current thoughts from the National Institutes of Health on the manner by which acupuncture might produce beneficial health results.

Many studies in animals and humans have demonstrated that acupuncture can cause multiple biological responses. These responses can occur locally, i.e., at or close to the site of application, or at a distance, mediated mainly by sensory neurons to many structures within the central nervous system. This can lead to activation of pathways affecting various physiological systems in the brain as well as in the periphery. A focus of attention has been the role of endogenous opioids in acupuncture analgesia. Considerable evidence supports the claim that opioid peptides are released during acupuncture and that the analgesic effects of acupuncture are at least partially explained by their actions. That opioid antagonists such as naloxone reverse the analgesic effects of acupuncture further strengthens this hypothesis. Stimulation by acupuncture may also activate the hypothalamus and the pituitary gland, resulting in a broad spectrum of systemic effects. Alteration in the secretion of neurotransmitters and neurohormones and changes in the regulation of blood flow, both centrally and peripherally, have been documented. There is also evidence that there are alterations in immune functions produced by acupuncture. Which of these and other physiological changes mediate clinical effects is at present unclear.

Despite considerable efforts to understand the anatomy and physiology of the "acupuncture points," the definition and characterization of these points remains controversial. Even more elusive is the scientific basis of some of the key traditional Eastern medical concepts such as the circulation of Qi, the meridian system, and other related theories, which are difficult to reconcile with contemporary biomedical information but continue to play an important role in the evaluation of patients and the formulation of treatment in acupuncture.

Some of the biological effects of acupuncture have also been observed when "sham" acupuncture points are stimulated, highlighting the importance of defining appropriate control groups in assessing biological changes purported to be due to acupuncture. Such findings raise questions regarding the specificity of these biological changes. In addition, similar biological alterations including the release of endogenous opioids and changes in blood pressure have been observed after painful stimuli, vigorous exercise, and/or relaxation training; it is at present unclear to what extent acupuncture shares similar biological mechanisms.

It should be noted also that for any therapeutic intervention, including acupuncture, the so-called "non-specific" effects account for a substantial proportion of its effectiveness, and thus should not be casually discounted. Many factors may profoundly determine therapeutic outcome including the quality of the relationship between the clinician and the patient, the degree of trust, the expectations of the patient, the compatibility of the backgrounds and belief systems of the clinician and the patient, as well as a myriad of factors that together define the therapeutic milieu.

Although much remains unknown regarding the mechanism(s) that might mediate the therapeutic effect of acupuncture, it is encouraging that a number of significant acupuncture-related biological changes can be identified and carefully delineated.

Further research in this direction not only is important for elucidating the phenomena associated with acupuncture, but also has the potential for exploring new pathways in human physiology not previously examined in a systematic manner.

Acupuncture At A Glance
Acupuncture has been shown to be effective for the treatment of nausea and vomiting in adults following surgery or taking chemotherapy and post-operative dental pain.
Acupuncture may be effective in treating a number of other conditions.
More research is needed to define more precisely the role of acupuncture in health care.
Reference: National National Institutes of Health of the U.S.
http://www.medicinenet.com/acupuncture/article.htm

Acupuncture: The practice of inserting needles into the body to reduce pain or induce anesthesia. More broadly, acupuncture is a family of procedures involving the stimulation of anatomical locations on or in the skin by a variety of techniques. There are a number of different approaches to diagnosis and treatment in American acupuncture that incorporate medical traditions from China, Japan, Korea, and other countries. The most thoroughly studied mechanism of stimulation of acupuncture points employs penetration of the skin by thin, solid, metallic needles, which are manipulated manually or by electrical stimulation.

Among the conditions for which acupuncture has been found to be useful is headache. Acupuncture reportedly leads to persisting, clinically relevant benefits for patients with chronic headache, particularly migraine.

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) has issued a consensus statement on acupuncture. The statement indicated that "There is sufficient evidence of acupuncture's value to expand its use into conventional medicine...." The full text of the conclusions of the NIH consensus statement on acupuncture is as follows:

"Acupuncture as a therapeutic intervention is widely practiced in the United States. There have been many studies of its potential usefulness. However, many of these studies provide equivocal results because of design, sample size, and other factors. The issue is further complicated by inherent difficulties in the use of appropriate controls, such as placebo and sham acupuncture groups."

"However, promising results have emerged, for example, efficacy of acupuncture in adult post-operative and chemotherapy nausea and vomiting and in postoperative dental pain. There are other situations such as addiction, stroke rehabilitation, headache, menstrual cramps, tennis elbow, fibromyalgia, myofascial pain, osteoarthritis, low back pain, carpal tunnel syndrome, and asthma for which acupuncture may be useful as an adjunct treatment or an acceptable alternative or be included in a comprehensive management program. Further research is likely to uncover additional areas where acupuncture interventions will be useful."

"Findings from basic research have begun to elucidate the mechanisms of action of acupuncture, including the release of opioids and other peptides in the central nervous system and the periphery and changes in neuroendocrine function. Although much needs to be accomplished, the emergence of plausible mechanisms for the therapeutic effects of acupuncture is encouraging."

"The introduction of acupuncture into the choice of treatment modalities readily available to the public is in its early stages. Issues of training, licensure, and reimbursement remain to be clarified. There is sufficient evidence, however, of its potential value to conventional medicine to encourage further studies."

"There is sufficient evidence of acupuncture's value to expand its use into conventional medicine and to encourage further studies of its physiology and clinical value."
http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=2132

Treatments for fibromyalgia:
http://www.medicinenet.com/fibromyalgia/page4.htm

Other Treatments

Local injections of analgesics and/or cortisone medication into the trigger point areas can also be helpful in relieving painful soft tissues, while breaking cycles of pain and muscle spasm. Some studies indicate that the pain-reliever tramadol (Ultram) and tramadol/acetaminophen (Ultracet) may be helpful for the treatment of fibromyalgia pains. The muscle relaxant cyclobenzaprine (Flexeril) has been helpful for reducing pain symptoms and improving sleep.

The nonsteroidal antiinflaofftopictory drugs (NSAIDs), while very helpful in treating other rheumatic conditions, have only a limited value in treating fibromyalgia pain. Narcotic pain relievers and cortisone medications have not been shown to be beneficial in this condition. Narcotics and cortisone medications are avoided because they have not been shown to be beneficial and they have potential adverse side effects, including dependency, when used long-term.

Both biofeedback and electroacupuncture have been used for relief of symptoms with some success. Standard acupuncture was recently reported to be effective in treating some patients with fibromyalgia.

Information from the NLM (National library of medicine) and NIH:

Does acupuncture work?
According to the NIH Consensus Statement on Acupuncture, there have been many studies on acupuncture's potential usefulness, but results have been mixed because of complexities with study design and size, as well as difficulties with choosing and using placebos or sham acupuncture. However, promising results have emerged, showing efficacy of acupuncture, for example, in adult postoperative and chemotherapy nausea and vomiting and in postoperative dental pain. There are other situations--such as addiction, stroke rehabilitation, headache, menstrual cramps, tennis elbow, fibromyalgia, myofascial pain, osteoarthritis, low-back pain, carpal tunnel syndrome, and asthma--in which acupuncture may be useful as an adjunct treatment or an acceptable alternative or be included in a comprehensive management program. An NCCAM-funded study recently showed that acupuncture provides pain relief, improves function for people with osteoarthritis of the knee, and serves as an effective complement to standard care.7 Further research is likely to uncover additional areas where acupuncture interventions will be useful.8

NIH has funded a variety of research projects on acupuncture. These grants have been funded by NCCAM, its predecessor the Office of Alternative Medicine, and other NIH institutes and centers.

Visit the NCCAM Web site, or call the NCCAM Clearinghouse for more information on scientific findings about acupuncture.

Read the NIH Consensus Statement on Acupuncture, to learn what scientific experts have said about the use and effectiveness of acupuncture for a variety of conditions.

An entire list of clinical trials of acupuncture:
http://clinicaltrials.gov/search/open/intervention=acupuncture
Some help with acupuncture's effectiveness others don't support it (more on this later). Some are even for current studies or preparing studies.

A brief index on auricular acupuncture:
Usichenko TI, Dinse M, Lysenyuk VP, Wendt M, Pavlovic D, Lehmann C.
Dept. of Anesthesiology & Intensive Care Medicine, University of Greifswald, Friedrich Loeffler Str. 23b, 17487 Greifswald, Germany. [email protected]

We studied whether auricular acupuncture reduces analgesic requirement during total hip arthroplasty. Sixty-four patients were enrolled in this patient/anesthesiologist-blinded study according to inclusion criteria. They were randomly assigned to receive acupuncture with indwelling fixed needles (points lung, shenmen, forehead and hip) or sham procedure (4 non-acupuncture points on the helix). Surgery was performed under standardized general anesthesia with volatile anesthetic isoflurane and opioid analgesic fentanyl, whereby isoflurane concentration was kept constant. Demographics, fentanyl requirement, duration of general anesthesia and success of patients' blinding were registered. Patients from the acupuncture group required 21% less fentanyl during surgery than those who received sham procedure. Other outcome measures were similar in both groups. Auricular acupuncture reduced fentanyl requirement compared to sham procedure during hip arthroplasty.

PMID: 17608061 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?Db=pubmed&Cmd=ShowDetailView&TermToSearch=17608061&ordinalpos=4&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum

There are probably close to 1,000s of articles out there written by MDs and scientists you have to know where to look here are great places to start.
www.pubmed.com
www.medlineplus.com
www.medicinenet.com

Here is a 75 page proposal and strategy to incorporate CAM (complementary alternative medicine) and IM (integrative medicine) from the World Health Organization to increase overall health status.
http://search.who.int/search?ie=utf8&site=default_collection&client=WHO&proxystylesheet=WHO&output=xml_no_dtd&oe=utf8&q=acupunture (Go under WHO traditional medicine strategy near bottom of page 'PDF')
A brief fact sheet on Traditional Medicine (acupuncture) from the WHO:
http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs134/en/

I will stop there, so you can get an idea of what is truly out there. Many people don't know how much research is truly being done towards the research of "Alternative medicine". But as quoted from the above article from the WHO “To speak of “alternative” medicine is…like talking about foreigners – both terms are vaguely pejorative and refer to large, heterogeneous categories defined by what they are
not rather than by what they are.” Pietroni P. British Medical Journal, 1992, 305:564–566.

Many people also claim that these studies are not done by "legit" agencies or companies. WHO? MDs? PhDs? are these not the same people that you side with in your arguments against "Alternative therapies"? Or are all these people indeed?


Please understand I am not a "Qi Thumper" as it were and I don't believe that Alternative medicines are FAR SUPERIOR TO WESTERN MEDICINE. But they can be used complementary to provide a more complete health care system. I don't believe I or any fellow practitioners of alternative medicine are superior to western MDs. Does acupuncture work??? Yes, does it work 100% of the time? NO, what the heck does? Even your medical and drug trials cannot claim 100% treatment rate, nor can they claim there is no placebo effect.

However, it does work, the simple fact that so much is being poured into research shows there is something else there. Can every single person ever treated with and helped with alternative therapies be from placebo effect or suggestion? What a mathematical and scientific anomaly that would be for that would also mean 100% of something is true.

There is strong evidence to suggest that some of these medical alternatives work. How? The chinese were never big on worrying about how, they know it works. There is also the idea that "chinese medicine" is only practiced in China, this is also false, Japan has it's own system (but similar with needles), same with Korea, Polynesia, Tibet, there is even evidence that the Mayan culture used similar ideas. Some indigenous tribes and people have used the ideas presented in these "alternative medicines" for 100s to 1000s of years.

It does not matter how many people do or don't believe in the practice of alternative medicines. All that matters is whether or not people get relief when other treatment modalities (alternative or western) have failed. We are so concerned about the HOW we don't stop to see that people are healing and living full lives b/c of these treatment therapies. I am not trying to "convert" anyone but rather give the information that is usually asked for.
 
Most of us are not qualified to do this research. We don't know how to evaluate statistical validity, investigators' credentials, don't know the funding source for articles we read on alt medicine, etc. Nor is there any reason we should have to take the time to do it. If I get liver cancer, I may do some reseearch, but I am not going to spend my time figuring out whether herbal cold remedies are credible.

This is why there is an FDA, and it's why there are tens of thousands of PhD chemists and biologists in universities spending $billions researching these issues. I am going to rely on an extensive set of qualified people to decide what is safe and effective, because they are more likely to get it right than I am. I don't have to do gas mileage tests or crash trials before I decide what kind of car to buy.


This is certainly true, but what it means to me is, "if Claritin or many chemo drugs made it through the testing process despite their limited effectiveness, imagine how useless the substances that don't make the grade are."
 
You do realize where much of these 'billions' comes from right? It's not usually coming directly out of University budgets per se... but out of grants and funding programs with paper trail connections to the mega-million dollar pharmaceutical industry. It's not as if PhD chemists and biologist were funding these studies out of their own pocket in some altruistic manner. Not the case at all.




Only that if you've followed the recent examples of what the FDA is interested in regulating and to some extent making illegal in terms of vitamins and health and fitness supplements... then you'd know that the FDA is not nearly as impartial as you're making them out to be.

The issue has been gone over in some detail here in the H&F forums.

It seems you view the FDA through very rose colored glasses.
 
It doesn't take genius or a degree to learn to do research. What it takes is time and effort, something too many people are unwilling to part with. If you are not responsible enough to learn about conditions or medications then you are pretty much doomed to just hoping that your doctor gets things right and that they are more responsible then the average doctor who basically prescribes whatever was handed out from the last pharm sales rep. Most doctors don't read the literature and very few check the efficacy of the drugs they prescribe.

Good luck with that.
 
A police force here in the UK recently claimed their crime figures showed an increase in violence around a full moon.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/kent/6723911.stm
http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/crime/article2617460.ece
http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/scitech.cfm?id=884302007
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/06/05/nmoon105.xml
http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=Police+full+moon&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-GBfficial&client=firefox-a

Seasonally Affected Disorder (SAD) is also fairly well recognised. In case you're not aware the seasons are governed by the Earths orbit of the sun, the moons orbit of the Earth, the tilt of the Earths rotational axis in relation to the sun etc.

Maybe all obstetricians are incredibly dense? I didn't watch all of the video. In fact I watched hardly any of it. I wouldn't ever consider YouTube as an appropriate source of factual information. Either way people are affected by both subtle and strong influences. So it's really a mute point.

No it doesn't and I never said it did. The point in using scorpions as an example is to show that there is a real world biological president for a different range of senses to develop. That being the case then there is really no reason why a human shouldn't develop a slightly or even radically different range of senses.

Take people with synthesia for example. Their brains are wired so differently from the rest of us that sensory input produces unexpected results. Their senses combine to give them a totally different view of the world from the rest of us.

When the medical profession was ignorant of synthesia people reporting their symptoms were dismissed as crack pots and attention seekers. It is entirely possible that some of what is lumped into the ESP reject bucket might be something similar. The perception of an aura for example could easily be the result of undiagnosed synthesia.
 
No, university research funding comes mainly from tax dollars. Pharma companies justify their pricing by claiming that high prices are necessary to pay for research, but in reality research is mostly paid for by the government. Only the last stages-clinical trials- are cost-effective for the marketing companies to pay for themselves. Nearly all the basic science and even animal studies are done at taxpayer expense. My opinion is that the government should nationalize the pharma companies, along with the rest of the medical industry.

As for whether I view the med establishment with rose colored specs, I will say that it is more reliable than the usual source of knowledge for herbal remedies. That would be a horoscope-reading clerk at a health food store repeating what a charlatan nutritional supplement salesman told him.
 
Most people are completely unable to evaluate information on this topic. Even the average person who is well educated in, say, business or liberal arts doesn't have a clue about the law of large numbers and would not understand why "my uncle took vitamin Z and his hair grew back" is not persuasive evidence. Check out the number of suckers who claim they know a special system for winning in Vegas. Look up the article last week from the NYT about men's vs women's lifetime numbers of sex partners-an NYT *science* writer did not understand the difference between median and mean! Further, most people don't understand the difference between selective self-reporting ("Jack in California says our product improved his life 100%") and statistical sampling or have the faintest idea of what a control group is. The average person falls for the post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy every time ("100% of all the people who took our cold remedy recovered. Therefore our product works!")
 
Slip is quite correct,
I can speak from some personal exp. I was a server in a "high posh" restaurant where we would weekly get one drug rep. renting out an entire room. With this room he would put on a presentation for Doctors & nurses, during this time, the tab was entirely on the drug company. The entire presentation? Was presentations set up to get the doctors and nurses to start using "new drugs, that far surpass old drugs".

It did not matter if even one doctor came or 50-100 the drug company bought their meals, open bar, even would front for valet parking. literally dropping Thousands of dollars per week just to get one new drug on the market.

Pre med students I know of say that even before they get out of premed drug companies will buy them dinners, lunches, pay for semesters of parking etc. All promoting new drugs for them to use when they graduate, talk about great marketing strategy.

You also realize most drugs approved by the FDA spend anywhere between 3-5 years in testing before market? But some patients I have seen in our clinic have been on drugs for 10+ years. How can they possibly know what the drugs will do with prolonged use, when most human trials only last 1-2 years? Or what about all the lawsuits for drugs coming out now? The FDA is acutally under severe pressure for taking too much money from drug companies, thus putting potentially unsafe drugs on the market:

By Steven Reinberg
HealthDay Reporter
FRIDAY, April 13 (HealthDay News) -- Controversy continues to engulf renewal of the Prescription Drug User Fee Act (PDUFA), with the key issue being whether the law does enough to protect U.S. consumers from potentially harmful drugs.

The act was passed by Congress in 1992 to establish "user fees" that are paid by drug companies to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to review and vote on new drug applications. In 2008, these user fees are expected to total $438 million and account for more than 42 percent of all the money the FDA receives for regulating drugs.

Now, several sides of the debate are expressed in a trio of opinions that will be published in the April 26 issue of The New England Journal of Medicine; the articles were released Friday to coincide with public debate on the issue.

Opinions about PDUFA, which has to be renewed every five years and is set to expire Sept. 30, vary. They range from those who think the user fees make the FDA too cozy with the drug companies, leading to compromised drug safety, to those who believe the funds are essential to the FDA. Still others think that more of these funds should be spent on drug safety than is currently planned by the FDA.

One of the NEJM articles, co-authored by Sean Hennessy, an assistant professor of pharmacology and epidemiology at the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, argues that more of the PDUFA money should go to FDA-funded drug safety studies once medications have been approved, to monitor their safety in the marketplace.

"FDA has dramatically insufficient resources to perform or commission post-approval safety studies," Hennessy said. "As a result of this, the American people rely almost exclusively on pharmaceutical companies to fund the research to identify the risks associated with their own products."

Hennessy noted that the current plan is to spend only $29.3 million of the almost $438 million in PDUFA fees for drug safety. "This is in stark contrast with the $12 billion spent on marketing prescription drugs each year," he said. "FDA should be provided with the resources so that they have to rely less on industry to study the risks associated with prescription drugs."

In another article, Dr. Jerry Avorn, a professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School and chief of the division of pharmacoepidemiology and pharmacoeconomics at Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston, states that renewal of PDUFA should be predicated on fixing what he sees as the dangerous shortcomings in the law. In particular, he is calling for more requirements for safety studies and better oversight of adverse drug effects.

Ultimately, Avorn would like to see the FDA's drug-related work funded by monies from federal revenues, not the drug industry.

"We are learning that the PDUFA is having important negative, unintended consequences," he said. "Drugs are being rushed through, not getting the attention they deserve. And the culture within the FDA has changed, seeing industry as the client they need to please.

"People within FDA say they feel they are under pressure to not find safety problems with drugs, and make approval decisions they would not have made if they were not under the gun," he added.

Avorn also thinks that if the law is renewed, the renewal should only be for a maximum of 12 months to allow time for a debate on the legislation and the current relationship between the drug industry and the FDA.

In a third article, former FDA Commissioner Dr. Mark McClellan, now a visiting senior fellow with the AEI-Brookings Joint Center for Regulatory Studies in Washington, D.C., says he supports renewal of PDUFA. But he also calls for congressional funding of the FDA to increase the dollars needed to improve drug safety.

The issue of drug safety exploded into the public's consciousness in 2004 when the arthritis drug Vioxx was removed from the market after post-approval studies found that it increased users' chances of heart attack and stroke. The FDA also faced sharp criticism from some quarters over the possible link between the family of antidepressants called selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and suicidal thoughts and actions in children.

One critic of PDUFA thinks the law should be repealed altogether.

"We have opposed PDUFA since shortly after it passed," said Dr. Sidney M. Wolfe, director of Public Citizen's Health Research Group. "FDA seemed to have done well for the first 86 years of its existence with funding coming entirely through the congressional appropriations process."

Once the law was passed in 1992, more drugs started being approved, Wolfe said. "When the FDA views the drug companies as their client, it erodes the adversary relationship. It changes it from being a regulator to being a collaborator," he said. "PDUFA needs to be repealed. It's not workable at all. The FDA is too important to be left to be funded by the industry it's supposed to be regulating."

Concern about drug safety in the United States was fueled by a scathing 2006 report by the U.S. Institute of Medicine (IOM). The report found that there is a "perception of crisis" that has compromised the credibility of FDA and of the pharmaceutical industry.

Drug safety is hampered by serious resource constraints on the FDA that weaken the quality and quantity of the science that is brought to bear on medication reviews, the report said.

In addition, the IOM found that the FDA and the "pharmaceutical industry do not consistently demonstrate accountability and transparency to the public by communicating safety concerns in a timely and effective fashion."


SOURCES: Sean Hennessy, Pharm.D., Ph.D., University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia; Jerry Avorn, M.D., professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School, and chief of the division of pharmacoepidemiology and pharmacoeconomics at Brigham and Women's Hospital, both in Boston; Sidney M. Wolfe, M.D., director, Public Citizen's Health Research Group, Washington, D.C.; April 26, 2007, New England Journal of Medicine; September 2006, Institute of Medicine report, The Future of Drug Safety: Promoting and Protecting the Health of the Public

Copyright © 2007 ScoutNews, LLC. All rights reserved.
http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=80473

Here is one where they are talking about doing a complete overhaul of the FDA:
http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=76808

And last but not least huge budget cuts for drugs and medicare:
http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=79330

So maybe you should think of doing a bit more research if you ever get a liver condition
 
Astrology = Pap.

Twins do not have the same future.
Planets were discovered AFTER astrology was invented.
You can't view the future without it effecting the future.
 
Dont confuse 'doctors and nurses' with the scientists who actually do the research. Maybe things work differently in the US but here in the UK most medical research in Universities is funded by the goverment, charities or other trusts. Sure, the pharmaceutical companies like to come round and give us freebies to encourage us to use their stuff, most of us just take it and run!
It doesnt mean that we go making stuff up to keep the companies happy!

And as far as researchers in Universities 'not doing it for altruistic purposes' goes, believe me we could make a hell of a lot more money working in sales and marketing!
 
I think SAD is much more governed by the weather and the overall amount of sunlight available. I know most people feel a lot better on holiday in Spain, with very little shift in position relative to the globe/orbits or anything else.
 
Back
Top