Unethical practices - drug industry

John DeFiore john_de at ix.netcom.com
Sat Aug 26 01:48:14 EST 1995

>Yes, it is generally true that a drug may be 
>"voluntarily" withdrawn by the manufacturer 
>(with some notable past exceptions) on the 
>basis of data collected during PREmarketing clinical 
>trials.  Of course, this is when FDA is still closely 
>examining all the data prior to approval.  But once a 
>new drug has been marketed, pharmaceutical companies 
>clearly do not want their drugs to be carefully 
>monitored in the real world of clinical practice--in 
>particular, not by any systematic method that can 
>sensitively compare possible ADR profiles.  A drug 
>company will indeed resort to unethical behavior when
>its profits appear to be threatened, even to the extent 
>of attempting to deprive physicians and their 
>patients of important new information.  For more 
>extensive documentation of these latter assertions, 
>E-mail me for a copy of a post I distributed last month 
>on "Hanky-Panky in the Pharmaceutical Industry."

Sorry, I did not read your post last month, but I wonder about the
ulcer drug Tagamet.  Seems to me I remember 10-15 years ago some
reasearchers who found out that ulcers may be linked to a bacteria, not
just stress and excess stomach acid.  They were ridiculed and laughed
at.  The establishment did it's best to discredit the result.  Of
course we know now that they were right.  Also Tagamet does nothing to
inhibit the bacteria, H. Pylori.  Also Tagamet is the most profitible
drug in history.  Also as soon as the patent ran out on Tagamet, new
researchers came along and found H. Pylori, and the findings were
widely accepted.  Now there are new treatments for ulcers.  I am not a
doctor, nor an ulcer patient.  I am not implying any connection between
any of the above events. All of the above is strictly based on my
possibly faulty memory.  I invite any comments.

More information about the Neur-sci mailing list