Biggest Research Fraud In Medical History

[PATHS, S.A.]

It's being called the largest research fraud in medical history.


Dr. Scott Reuben, a former member of Pfizer's speakers' bureau, has plead guilty to faking dozens of research studies that were published in medical journals.


His research study, which was published in a medical journal, has since been quoted by hundreds of other doctors and researchers as "proof" that Celebrex is a safe and effective drug.


There's only one problem with all this: No patients were ever enrolled in the study!


And it wasn't the first study faked by Dr. Reuben: He also faked study data on Bextra and Vioxx drugs, reports the Wall Street Journal.


The Day of London reports that 21 articles written by Dr. Reuben that appear in medical journals have apparently been fabricated, too, and must be retracted. And an internal audit there found that Dr. Reuben had been faking research data for 13 years.


What's notable about this story is not the fact that a medical researcher faked clinical trials for the pharmaceutical industry. The real story here is that this is business as usual in the pharmaceutical industry.


Drug companies bribe researchers and doctors as a routine matter. Medical journals routinely publish false, fraudulent studies. FDA panel members regularly rely on falsified research in making their drug approval decisions, and the mainstream media regularly quotes falsified research in reporting the news.


These are the kinds of people and companies that most rely on to keep them in good health!


Do not let Big Pharma and the Government feed you any more lies. Their "good science" is not science at all and your health is not their goal!


Take control of your health and well-being by saying NO to Big Pharma and saying YES to holistic healing like PATHS.

[wpage]

Sounds like global warming research info...

It's being called the largest research fraud in medical history.


Dr. Scott Reuben, a former member of Pfizer's speakers' bureau, has plead guilty to faking dozens of research studies that were published in medical journals.


His research study, which was published in a medical journal, has since been quoted by hundreds of other doctors and researchers as "proof" that Celebrex is a safe and effective drug.


There's only one problem with all this: No patients were ever enrolled in the study!


And it wasn't the first study faked by Dr. Reuben: He also faked study data on Bextra and Vioxx drugs, reports the Wall Street Journal.


The Day of London reports that 21 articles written by Dr. Reuben that appear in medical journals have apparently been fabricated, too, and must be retracted. And an internal audit there found that Dr. Reuben had been faking research data for 13 years.


What's notable about this story is not the fact that a medical researcher faked clinical trials for the pharmaceutical industry. The real story here is that this is business as usual in the pharmaceutical industry.


Drug companies bribe researchers and doctors as a routine matter. Medical journals routinely publish false, fraudulent studies. FDA panel members regularly rely on falsified research in making their drug approval decisions, and the mainstream media regularly quotes falsified research in reporting the news.


These are the kinds of people and companies that most rely on to keep them in good health!


Do not let Big Pharma and the Government feed you any more lies. Their "good science" is not science at all and your health is not their goal!


Take control of your health and well-being by saying NO to Big Pharma and saying YES to holistic healing like PATHS.

What is the source of this data?

[Aaron]

Fda

Some European organization announced that the swine flu is indeed a hoax.
I will find the reference to that, it was emailed to me in the last 2 weeks.

It has come out publicly in the past that FDA "scientists" help to pass a
drug only to become employed by the drug company afterward with a big
salary.

It also came out publicly in the past that there are many studies that the
doctors sign onto but never took part in the study.

But I don't think I've seen one that shows there wasn't even a study!

It really is common business with the FDA and the whole thing should be
disbanned as an illegal fraud against the American people or at least have
data reviewed by not only FDA but multiple third party independent groups
to validate the accuracy of claims, studies, etc... until then it is the fox
guarding the hen house. Disgraceful!

[Kevin]

What is the source of this data?

I do not know the source of the post that PATHS put up, but I just did a google search using the words "fraud" and "Dr. Reuben".

Got this link to a medical industry website-

Routine Audit Uncovered Reuben Fraud

Seems to be about the same guy.

Oh, here is another link from the WSJ

Health Blog - Search Results


Seems there are hundreds of sites that are reporting this as far back as March 2009.


While the info in this report is sad (and for many should be a WAKE UP call)....it is not surprising. In my files I have certified copies of reports from the early 1900's documenting FDA fraud for profit.

+1 on what Aaron said about the hen house.

[ewizard]

I knew someone who personally spoke to the 2nd highest person in the FDA. This person I knew was very well trained in getting the truth from people (in the course of normal conversation - they often didn't even know they were being questioned or investigated). I was told that FDA person admitted they take money in an 'under the table' manner to push drugs through for approval from the pharmaceutical companies. I consider the pharmaceutical companies to be one of the most ruthless type of companies in the world. I've seen first hand how they work. Search also Dr. Rath for a lot of good info from a doctor who is outside the matrix so to speak. The average doctor in the U.S. receives from $10k to $100k in gifts, kickbacks and money from pharmaceutical companies for writing prescriptions. I've seen such transactions take place in person.
This is exactly right - the big pharma has one interest - big profit. Nearly every thing they peddle has bad side effects - for which they will gladly prescribe you another drug to counter.... and another and so on.

The really scary thing right now is the Dietary Supplement Safety Act of 2010. See the thread I started here : Click this Energetic forum thread This is a major attempt by big Pharma to keep us from using natural vitamins, herbs and foods to stay healthy. This is BIG - please help stop this.

[Aaron]

side effects are direct effects

Nearly every thing they peddle has bad side effects - for which they will gladly prescribe you another drug to counter.... and another and so on.

The really scary thing right now is the Dietary Supplement Safety Act of 2010. See the thread I started here : Click this Energetic forum thread This is a major attempt by big Pharma to keep us from using natural vitamins, herbs and foods to stay healthy. This is BIG - please help stop this.

Something that many people know is that the drugs have more "side effects"
than desired effects. Actually, there is no such thing as a "side effect", they
are all direct specific effects from the drug..just undesired.

In a hospital, if a new side effect or unreported side effect is noticed
on any particular drug, do you know that it is VOLUNTARY that a nurse
can fill out a form and report it!!? It is NOT required that they report any
side effects that are above and beyond what is already "cleared" through
the FDA. But of course, they want to make sure that vitamins and herbs
are safe! The endless joke of of the fda.

[ewizard]

This is a surprising tidbit I picked up today that was actually on CNN (who has heavy advertising from drug makers). This is a quote from an article in which the Senate was investigating yet another dangerous drug by GlaxoSmithKline which is causing heart attacks. The Senate report stated:

"The Senate committee investigation stems from concerns that Avandia and other high-profile drugs put "public safety at risk because the FDA has been too cozy with drug makers and has been regularly outmaneuvered by companies that have a financial interest in downplaying or under-exploring potential safety risks," the report states."

Of course it's only words unless they do something about this.

[PATHS, S.A.]

The source of this info comes from several websites including:

Fraud Case Rocks Anesthesiology Community

Massive Fraud Calls Into Question Multimodal Analgesia « Medical Writing, Editing & Grantsmanship

Independent news on natural health, nutrition and more

[Aaron]

Glaxo chief: Our drugs do not work on most patients

Most drugs don't work most of the time, this is an old favorite:

Saturday, December 13, 2003 Glaxo chief: Our drugs do not work on most patients
Glaxo chief: Our drugs do not work on most patients

A senior executive with Britain's biggest drugs company has admitted that most prescription medicines do not work on most people who take them. Allen Roses, worldwide vice-president of genetics at GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), said fewer than half of the patients prescribed some of the most expensive drugs actually derived any benefit from them.

It is an open secret within the drugs industry that most of its products are ineffective in most patients but this is the first time that such a senior drugs boss has gone public. His comments come days after it emerged that the NHS drugs bill has soared by nearly 50 per cent in three years, rising by £2.3bn a year to an annual cost to the taxpayer of £7.2bn. GSK announced last week that it had 20 or more new drugs under development that could each earn the company up to $1bn (£600m) a year.

Drugs for Alzheimer's disease work in fewer than one in three patients, whereas those for cancer are only effective in a quarter of patients. Drugs for migraines, for osteoporosis, and arthritis work in about half the patients, Dr Roses said. Most drugs work in fewer than one in two patients mainly because the recipients carry genes that interfere in some way with the medicine, he said.

"The vast majority of drugs - more than 90 per cent - only work in 30 or 50 per cent of the people," Dr Roses said. "I wouldn't say that most drugs don't work. I would say that most drugs work in 30 to 50 per cent of people. Drugs out there on the market work, but they don't work in everybody."
Therapeutic area: drug efficacy rate in per cent
Alzheimer's: 30 *Analgesics (Cox-2): 80 *Asthma: 60 *Cardiac Arrythmias: 60 *Depression (SSRI): 62 *Diabetes: 57 *Hepatits C (HCV): 47 *Incontinence: 40 *Migraine (acute): 52 *Migraine (prophylaxis)50 *Oncology: 25 *Rheumatoid arthritis50 *Schizophrenia: 60