corner
Healthy Skepticism
Join us to help reduce harm from misleading health information.
Increase font size   Decrease font size   Print-friendly view   Print
Register Log in

Healthy Skepticism Library item: 14594

Warning: This library includes all items relevant to health product marketing that we are aware of regardless of quality. Often we do not agree with all or part of the contents.

 

Publication type: news

Key Findings On Psychiatric Drug Research
Dallas News.com 2008 Oct 26
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/texassouthwest/stories/DN-cmapbox_26tex.ART.State.Edition1.4a86d1f.html


Full text:

Documents obtained by The Dallas Morning News concerning a proposed list of psychiatric drugs that can be used by foster children show Texas researchers and mental-health officials also:

• Discussed the need to defeat a bill in the Legislature that would have banned the use of psychiatric drugs in foster children younger than 5. They indicated the bill would prevent children from getting the medical treatment they need. The bill never made it past a legislative committee.

• Reduced information on child suicide risks in one of their published papers, at the request of a prestigious medical journal. “Please drastically prune this section,” an editor of the Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry wrote, in an effort to shorten the report. “Even the detailed discussion of risk factors for suicide is out of place in a paper reporting a medication algorithm.”

• Accepted complaints and feedback on an adult psychiatric drug list from Eli Lilly and Janssen, two pharmaceutical companies that donated grant money to the research protocols. The changes the representatives requested prompted one longtime mental health advocate to question “the influence of the pharmaceutical industry in our processes overall.” A state official who responded to the advocate said they took all drug company suggestions with a grain of salt.

• Considered incentives to get children enrolled in drug plan trials, including offering them gift certificates to Blockbuster and McDonald’s. It’s unclear whether the incentives were ever offered.

 

  Healthy Skepticism on RSS   Healthy Skepticism on Facebook   Healthy Skepticism on Twitter

Please
Click to Register

(read more)

then
Click to Log in
for free access to more features of this website.

Forgot your username or password?

You are invited to
apply for membership
of Healthy Skepticism,
if you support our aims.

Pay a subscription

Support our work with a donation

Buy Healthy Skepticism T Shirts


If there is something you don't like, please tell us. If you like our work, please tell others.

Email a Friend








Cases of wilful misrepresentation are a rarity in medical advertising. For every advertisement in which nonexistent doctors are called on to testify or deliberately irrelevant references are bunched up in [fine print], you will find a hundred or more whose greatest offenses are unquestioning enthusiasm and the skill to communicate it.

The best defence the physician can muster against this kind of advertising is a healthy skepticism and a willingness, not always apparent in the past, to do his homework. He must cultivate a flair for spotting the logical loophole, the invalid clinical trial, the unreliable or meaningless testimonial, the unneeded improvement and the unlikely claim. Above all, he must develop greater resistance to the lure of the fashionable and the new.
- Pierre R. Garai (advertising executive) 1963