-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Drug-Makers Paying Off Competitors To Keep Cheap Generics Off Market
,----[ Quote ]
| Republicans and their allies in the business
| community talk a good game about the virtues
| of free-market competition. But, as we've
| seen in the debate over the public option,
| that stance often goes out the window when
| corporate profits are at stake.
|
| And now we've got another example -- one of
| the sleaziest and most blatantly self-serving
| yet.
`----
http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/12/drug-makers_paying_off_competitors_to_keep_cheap_g.php?ref=fpa
Pay-For-Delay Agreements Again Show How Pharma Abuses Patent Law To Harm Us All
http://techdirt.com/articles/20091204/0026397198.shtml
Recent:
Medical Papers by Ghostwriters Pushed Therapy
,----[ Quote ]
| Newly unveiled court documents show that ghostwriters paid by a
| pharmaceutical company played a major role in producing 26 scientific papers
| backing the use of hormone replacement therapy in women, suggesting that the
| level of hidden industry influence on medical literature is broader than
| previously known.
`----
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/05/health/research/05ghost.html?_r=2&pagewanted=1
Elsevier Reveals More Details About Its Fake Journal Division
,----[ Quote ]
| Remember how Elsevier and Merck were caught putting out a fake journal that
| had articles favoring Merck drugs, implying peer reviewed articles that
| weren't? Soon afterwards, it came out that Elsevier had a whole division for
| such things. However, following an internal investigation, it looks like
| Elsevier is backtracking a bit and saying that, while the group's practices
| were problematic, most weren't as egregious as the "Australasian Journal of
| Bone and Joint Medicine (AJBJM)" that was created by Merck and Elsevier.
`----
http://techdirt.com/articles/20090606/0632555149.shtml
Elsevier Had A Whole Division Publishing Fake Medical Journals
,----[ Quote ]
| Remember a week ago when we wrote about pharma giant Merck and publishing
| giant Elsevier working together to publish a fake journal that talked up
| various Merck drugs and was used by doctors to show that the drugs were safe
| and useful?
`----
http://techdirt.com/articles/20090510/2157144822.shtml
No bottom to worse at Elsevier?
,----[ Quote ]
| The latest development, though, strikes me as something that should be
| shouted from every available rooftop: Elsevier simply must answer the
| questions raised.
|
| Via Dorothea: Jonathan Rochkind has done a little "forensic librarianship"
| and raised astonishing questions about the entire imprint, Excerpta Medica,
| which published the fake journal that started all of this.
|
| Go read Jonathan, but the bottom line is this: Excerpta Medica does not
| provide a straightforward list of its own publications or make clear which
| are, ahem, "industry-sponsored".
`----
http://www.sennoma.net/main/archives/2009/05/no_bottom_to_worse_at_elsevier.php
Another Reason We Need Open Access
,----[ Quote ]
| One of the more laughable reasons that traditional science publishers cite in
| their attempts to rubbish open access is that it's somehow not so rigorous
| as "their" kind of publishing. There's usually a hint that standards might be
| dropped, and that open access journals aren't, well, you know, quite proper.
`----
http://opendotdotdot.blogspot.com/2009/05/another-reason-we-need-open-access.html
Merck Makes Phony Peer-Review Journal
,----[ Quote ]
| It is this attitude within companies like Merck and among doctors that allows
| scandals precisely like this to happen. While the scandals with Merck and
| Vioxx are particularly egregious, we know they are not isolated incidents.
| This one is just particularly so. If physicians would not lend their names or
| pens to these efforts, and publishers would not offer their presses, these
| publications could not exist. What doctors would have as available data would
| be peer-reviewed research and what pharmaceutical companies produce from
| their marketing departments--actual advertisements.
`----
http://blog.bioethics.net/2009/05/merck-makes-phony-peerreview-journal/
Merck And Elsevier Exposed For Creating Fake Peer Review Journal
,----[ Quote ]
| Of course, this is exactly the sort of thing that you can do when everything
| is locked up and proprietary, rather than open. There's almost no way to
| confirm or check the data or information to make sure it's legit, so people
| tend to assume it is. In that regard, perhaps it's no surprise that the two
| companies eventually went down this road, but it does highlight one of the
| problems with the way the system works today. As Shirky later points out this
| is hardly unique for a firm like Elsevier, which has faced some serious
| ethical questions regarding its publications in the past as well.
`----
http://techdirt.com/articles/20090503/1255574725.shtml
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
iEYEARECAAYFAksdcv8ACgkQU4xAY3RXLo7MqwCgh5jxEIzf7rjgCvHZl9EuvbL1
DwkAoKdv81nGxsc+iM5s6Y2oWS28CJHr
=vmOH
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
|
|
