[Foundation-l] Misplaced Reliance, was Re: Paid editing, was Re: Ban and...

[Andreas Kolbe]

--- On Mon, 1/11/10, Risker <risker.wp at gmail.com> wrote:
> > You don't seem to have read the cited article. And to
> be changing the
> > subject. Peer review decides what is to be published,
> based on quality
> > and significance. Errors are made as scientists hold
> views as to what
> > that is at any particular time and venue which may be
> more or less
> > enlightened.
> >
> > Fred
> >
> 
> 
> I read it, Fred. And the subject of the thread was "should
> we be saying that
> the drug company paid for the research"; at least that's
> what it was when I
> commented.
> 
> My point still stands. The drug company *always* pays for
> the research.
> Mentioning it is irrelevant to the quality of the article
> itself.


Studies are not only funded by drug companies themselves. Sometimes such 
research is undertaken by foundations, by neutral bodies, and even by
competing manufacturers.

There are significant statistical differences between the results of 
manufacturer-funded studies, and those done by others.

Ethics standards in media and scholarly publishing have stated for many 
years that any conflicts of interest should be reported *as a matter of 
course*; there are further sources on this in the MEDRS talk page thread.

Andreas