Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Merck Created Phony Peer-Review Medical Journal

pickens (49171) writes | more than 5 years ago

Medicine 3

Hugh Pickens writes "Don't believe everything you read on the internet is a good rule to follow, but it turns out that you can't even believe a "peer reviewed scientific journal" as details emerge that drug manufacturer Merck created a phony, but real sounding, peer-review journal titled the "Australasian Journal of Bone and Joint Medicine" to publish data favorable to its products. "What's sad is that I'm sure many a primary care physician was given literature from Merck that said, 'As published in Australasian Journal of Bone and Joint Medicine, Fosamax outperforms all other medications....'" writes Summer Johnson in a post on the website of the American Journal of Bioethics. One Australian rheumatologist named Peter Brooks who served as an "honorary advisory board" to the journal didn't receive a single paper for peer-review in his entire time on the board, but it didn't bother him because he apparently knew the journal did not receive original submissions of research. All this is probably not too surprising in light of Merck's difficulties with Vioxx, the once $2.5 billion a year drug that was pulled from the market in September 2004, after a study showed it doubled the risk of heart attack and stroke in long-term users resulting in payments by Merck of $4.85 billion to settle personal injury claims from former users, but it bears repeating that "if physicians would not lend their names or pens to these efforts, and publishers would not offer their presses, these publications could not exist.""

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

It's as if everyone thinks physicians are dumb (1)

drunkenoafoffofb3ta (1262668) | more than 5 years ago | (#27797129)

Pharma and the media. Doctors know what journals are good. If you've never heard of a journal, that makes you question the quality of the work. Med schools drum this in to you. Sure, by deluge the message will seep in, but these medics are aware of this happening, and are armed -- with a brain -- to you know... evaluate data and form opinions.

Re:It's as if everyone thinks physicians are dumb (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27797355)

Nonsense. The drug companies wouldn't pull this crap if it didn't get results.

Re:It's as if everyone thinks physicians are dumb (1)

Scannerman (1136265) | more than 5 years ago | (#27804397)

If you've never heard of a journal, that makes you question the quality of the work.

Absolute Bullshit (My Wife was a medical librarian)

There are thousands of medical journals. Of course you know the main ones for each specialisation and each country, but if something was referenced you wouldn't necessarily look further. The fact that this was published by Elsevier would give it a fair amount of credibility.

Its difficult to know what impact not being on MEDLINE would have - If you were a librarian or researcher seriously looking suspicions would be raised, But most Doctors don't get that involved.Think of it yourself, If an advert for a PC or a car or whatever references a credible sounding statistic do you always check the source?

This isn't about seriously distorting research, Its about building credibility for Products. It works.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?