In Sergio Sismondo’s paper entitled “How pharmaceutical industry funding affects trial outcomes: Causal structures and responses”, he speaks to the problem of having multiple trials with predictable outcomes. By this, he means that trials are often performed on drugs which have already been tested for a specific result, on people on whom it is known that it will have a great affect. Obviously, trials of this sort seem very redundant. Their purpose is solely one of promotion, but these studies are actually very deceptive to the unknowing population.
I do not think that trials of this sort should be allowed. We read an article recently which stated that a particular SSRI was only truly effective for those who are extremely depressed. Imagine that new trials for this SSRI are only performed on this small database of people. It is no suprise that the efficacy of the medication is going to seem exceptionally better than it might actually be in reality. It does not seem ethical that the results from these trials are then being circulated, thus creating a false perception for consumers and perhaps even physicians, that their medication is more effective than it really is. Sponsored, manipulated trials are bound to create a false perception of the drug, and consumers will fall into the consumer trap, even though it may not be right for them. Funded trials should not be allowed, especially such specifically controlled ones, because they offer an unrealistic perception of the efficacy of the drug, which in turn is deception to the consumers.
Prozac Time | Life O… on Prozac & Sarafe- Identical… shitangshuroy on What Constitutes ‘Genuin… shitangshuroy on Further Ethical Issues in… 14 to 40 percent of… on Publication bias shitangshuroy on Should Pharmaceutical Advertis…