Feb
as traditional medicines so therefore are not always to be trusted.,but should'nt we also be sceptical of doctors' being paid by drugs companies to try out their various medicines and being paid to do so? Mightn't a GP be more inclined to try a medicne where s/he is being paid more?
Answer:
I was a pharmaceutical representative for over thirty years, both in the UK and in Germany, I worked for several well known companies who have produced products that might have kept you and your parents alive.
Physicians are NOT paid by drug companies to 'try out' various medicines, and they are definitely not paid more for prescribing a particular company's product, you obviously have no idea whatsoever how the system works so what puts you in a position to judge it?
Each single prescription that a GP writes is checked by higher authorities, it's cost, it's efficacy and it's relevance to the patient's complaint, each GP surgery has a budget for drugs which is constantly under review, it is the most highly regulated authority in the country.
I'm glad that you concur that substitute remedies (I never dignify them by calling them medicines) have not been tested to the same extent, take homoeopathic tablets as one example, how can you test a product that has no active constituents left in it through over dilution?
The most costly thing I've ever given to any of the thousands, yes thousands of GPs that I met in my career is a pie and a pint in a pub.
EDIT: With regards to the comment “at the very VERY final stages ie, when its released on the public, but they want more data”, a drug either has a licence to be prescribed or it hasn't, there's no 'nearly' phase.
EDIT2: The 'flat earth sociey' has been around for thousands of years also, but my belief, scientifically proven, is that it's round!
EDIT3: Some great answers to your question from the usual reliable people, you deserve a star.
EDIT4: Of course Jabril, drug companies use volunteers to test their drugs, the drugs have passed all other trials and are considered safe to use on humans, they’re extremely well monitored in hospitals, here's just one example, and of course they do get paid and it's absolutely ethical and above board.
http://www.trials4us.co.uk/about/index.p…
Answer:
Thanks for those who voted for my answer, the problem with the pharmaceutical companies is that they do make a lot of money, but few people comprehend that most of the money goes back into developing new products.
When a new product…..cont.
Report Abuse
Answer:
……is formulated, because of all the rigorous (quite rightly so) testing that has to be carried out, it takes on average ten years before it's on the market, and for each new product that makes it, a thousand don't, that's some investment.
Report Abuse
Answer:
All traditional medicines have to pass through multi-million (sometimes billion) dollar testing to ensure that they are safe and that they work. Many drugs are subtle variations on each other; they might come in a different colored bottle, but they have the ability to be essentially the same and of course have to go through the same tests.
You have the option of doing your own research and asking your physician why they use one type of drug over another, and also of refusing that drug if you’re not satisfied. Certainly you'll have the reassurance with any pharmaceutical drug that it has had extensive testing to make sure it works and identify any side effects. Alternative medicine has none of this testing, little is known about side effects and of course it rarely works above the placebo effect.
Edit: “Appeal to Tradition” is the logical fallacy that just because something has been done for many years, it must be correct. Thinking that somehow chinese medicine is now being 'revealed' to the West is also wrong. Any proven treatment invented by any country will come into mainstream use if it works. After thousands of years, chinese medicine is still not intergrated into real medicine.
Edit: Large Pharma bribes physicians with nice sandwiches? I think at last the truth has finally emerged!
Answer:
What you should be skeptical about is what studies the drug companies have hidden from public view. That is what’s so great about the World wide web, the info is out there, you just need to dig it out. Many drugs currently on the market were approved with really shoddy studies and it shows in the number of recalls and deaths caused by them.
On the other hand many alternative medicines are being tested anymore, just not by Massive Pharma. And of course some alternative medicines have been used for thousands of years in various parts of the world with great results. There’s a reason why people spend so much on the alternatives. It just can't all be bogus.
Answer:
The bottom line is that real medicine is science based, and regardless of the profit incentive, pharmaceutical companies have to clinically test there products to prove they actually work. This involves, not anecdotal testimonials, but double blind testing, repeated over time, on massive groups, with controls. This is an anathema to the alternative medicine community, who rely on testimonial and feedback in the place of real research and testing.
All alternative products have to establish is that they are not actually harmful. Homoeopathic “treatments” for example are undoubtedly safe, because they are just water - they’ve no active ingredient at all!
Bottom line - if it works, it isn't 'alternative', if it doesn't, it isn't medicine!
Answer:
Doctors aren't being paid to prescribe medicines. I've been prescribing all sorts of medication and I have not once been given anything.
If you're talking about the gifts and sponsorship given by medical representatives, I think that's already illegal in many countries and many professional organizations frown upon it.
Another point: Drugs that have been released on the market are proven to work and the drug companies push to have them prescribed by physicians. It's called marketing.
Answer:
well, it depends what you mean…..if you’re speaking in the same sense that Christopher Columbus *discovered* America (even though people were already living there), then yes you are correct.
but in *reality* your assertation isn’t correct. Chinese medicine has been around for a few thousand years. They’ve been 'testing' their 'alternative medicines' (by substitute, i mean original!) on live people in live 'trials' for thousands of years. The west is still learning from the chinese, and are trying desperately to patent some of their medicines so that they have the ability to sell it to the rest of the western world. The thing is, natural drugs can’t be 'owned' so the pharmaticutical companies wont make money from it….think, there’s even a hospital in Bejing that treat cancer….thats all they do! Cancer patients only…..and they’ve much success…..like sitting in a hot bath full of herbs for a few hours a day can cure skin cancers…..
so, i would state that chinese medicine is far more advanced in the testing proceedure……especially as western medicine doesnt really study the combined effects of different durgs taken at the same time.
it takes 14 years just to qualify as a chinese doc.
EDIT…..
worth noting that the philosophy behind treatment is different in the east and west…..the west treat the symptom, the east treat the cause
i just re read your question…..yes, drug campanies do 'bribe' GPs to use their drugs. Usually this is only a nice sandwich brought to them at lunch time and stuff like that, cause laws have become stricter now (my wife used to work in that industry in UK). But as far as the trials part is concerned, well, that would only be possible at the very VERY final stages ie, when its released on the public, but they want more data so they have the ability to assess it more. So not exactly the trial stage.
But OFCOURSE doctors get incentices/propaganda on using different brands of drugs
EDIT 2…….
coco….i agree with you…….a few ththere was a chinese general who was injured during battle, who had to have his leg amputated. This was done using accupuncture, on the battlefield, while he STILL controlled the battle!!! Only 100 or so years ago, people in the west were given a bottle of whiskey and a piece of leather to bite on!
EDIT 3…….
i found this interesting so i re-read it……
VERY very final stages of testing……i am repeating what i was told by a friend who is a scientist involved in producing and testing the drugs. I dont know what his title is, but i know he is high up, least because he is fairly loaded! I’m telling you what he told me…..that although a drug has a license for public use, it still has to be watched carefully and this forms part of the proceedure. I dont know what this process is technically called, but i term it as testing.
Pharma companies DO provide incentive for the GPs. Period. They dont give financial renumeration, they dont bribe in any way that could be called a bribe. But they do definately do a bit more than just email a physician the skinny on their latest product!!! Although the law prevents anything that would even resemble a bribe or other financial incentives or gains, it doesnt stop them trying!!!! Some docs are very pleased to get their free sandwich and chock bar while they listen to the sales reps propaganda….and the reps know the docs who sell out for a sandwich or a hat or umbrella!!!! Sorry but people are cheap, and sometimes just making people *feel* important is all you need 
another interesting fact for people who think that 'things' cant be done just because a particular law is there or something along those lines…..tobacco companes in UK can/and do hold cigarette promotions!!! Now how many people would argue till they are blue in the face that i am wrong???? yet its FACT!!!
Answer:
I don't agree with you. Although it is considered alternative medicine, in Germany you’ll get homeopathic remedies on prescription from your GP. And accupuncture has been used by 'proper' physicians to control pain during surgery! It depends on how popular something is, some things will have been subjected to proper studies.
But how do you figure a GP gets paid more for prescribing a certain medicine rather than another? That's not how it works in the UK, maybe the US!
Answer:
That's not how it works at all. In the UK, GPs do NOT take bonuses from drug companies. All drugs that are prescribed are approved by NICE and have to demonstrate safety, efficacy and cost effectiveness prior to being approved. GPs generally go with the recommended drug of choice.
Something either works or it doesn't. If AltMed worked then we'd be using it. With the exception of perhaps some herbal remedies, It doesn't, time to move on.
The problem is, the alties use the conspiracy theories as an excuse for why their practices don’t work. This is childish hysterical emotion. If it works, why don't they set up their own controlled studies and prove it works?
EDIT
Yes but there’s a world outside America. Actually thats a very good point. It's interesting how most of the hardcore alties on here are American
Answer:
It is a common Altie myth….repeated constantly by some on this board….that physicians are somehow paid by drug companies to prescribe their drugs. There is no truth to this.
It is true that pharmaceutical companies spend millions of dollars on direct advertising to consumers…at least in the USA. They also do provide “free” samples of drugs to physicians in the hope that if a patient is sampled with a particular drug, they’ll be more prone to be prescribed. They also do lots of other promotional things…note pads, pens, calendars, mouse pads etc with drug names. Many educational events for doctors are underwritten by pharmaceutical companies as well. Finally, in days gone by, there were more blatant attempts to influence prescribing practices such as trips, personal etc. Those last sort of things haven't been around for many years.
However….cash for drugs? Never happened. There is a separation of the prescriber (MD) from the dispenser (pharmacist) so that there is no conflict of interest. There is no way for a drug company to be able to track which doctor prescribed which drug as, in Canada at least, this is confidential information,
Personally…I never talk to drug reps, I rarely go to educational events that they have directly sponsored and I’m well aware of their attempts to influence prescribing practice. I do use samples to start people off on a medication, but that doesn't mean I may end up prescribing that drug. I also use samples to help out people who can't afford their meds.
But….I'm still waiting for my fat cheque.
Answer:
Seeing as that isn't REMOTELY how drug testing or use actually comes about….
No.
And you’ve no idea what you're talking about.
The reason “alternative medicines” aren't tested, used, etc….are because they generally have no basis for anyone to do so in the first place.
Go google “snake oil”.
Answer:
So long as the alternatives are not free, any claims of bribes or paying off physicians or any such other money driven greed theories must be applied to the alternatives as well.
Why judge a doctor getting a kickback, but not a nutritionist selling his proprietary remedy for a 500% mark up from what the initial ingredients are? Shouldn't they be judge with the same standards?
Answer:
In the UK at least there is no positive link between financial remuneration and drugs prescribed. In fact GPs are penalised if they prescribe drugs where the cost benefit is in question or where those drugs do not appear on either NICE, SIGN or local formularies.
Answer:
Well it's good to be skeptical, Bridget, and that means you should always be skeptical of conspiracy theories.
I think this is a done and dusted issue now.
——-
EDIT: I should probably add, even if such corruption does go on, it still not evidence for the efficacy of alt med.
Answer:
In the US, this is a sad partial reality. Drug companies spend a lot of money courting physicians, and physicians will often pay it back with loyalty to the drug company. Drug companies cannot outright pay a physician for prescribing a drug, but an invite to an all expense paid convention isn’t technically a payment. Even things as simple as buying lunch can help establish relationships, but this is not necessarily a bad thing. Physicians are human and have their faults, but the system is designed to minimize poor choices based on perks. The real target of the pharmaceutical companies in the US is the consumer, who will frequently go to their physician and request a drug they really don't need. The doctor will often just prescribe it.
There is one major aspect in the use of conventional drugs that is not shared by alternatives. The consumer is always able to research the drug himself, and the consumer can always find an informed second opinion.
Answer:
I don't necessarily concur.
Edzard Ernst disagreed with the WHO's finding on acupunture and homeopathy when they did systematic reviews on the research available. He used a calculating skale which was devised rating the quality of research from 0 - 5. he excluded any studies which had a rating of less than 4 and recalculated the results.
This seems like a fair thing to do but Mr Ernst neglected to mention that many of the research studies done on medicine get a rating of 2 using the same scale.
Research is also loaded as experiments are designed to make a product or methodology look more favourable so it is possible to design experiments to hide flaws (not always). The research is also paid for and conducted by the people who make the product (including altmed research). This is the equivalent to a business being able to select their own tax collector. Of course they are going to select one that can make their case look more favourable.
Research needs to be revamped.
For one thing lets get rid of this reductionist rubbish of trying to prove one process controls totally everything for another lets make it truly independent and have an independent body design and conduct the research.
Research is necessary but doesn't necessarily reveal the absolute truth. Complete independance helps to get rid of some of the bias.
Even though Anecdote isn’t always reliable to state it counts for nothing is foolish.
I have the ability to tell you that osteopathic treatment helps 9 /10 of the people who come to see me for musculo-skeletal pain. I get called a fraud delusional, a charlatan etc because there are so few RCT's.
A surgeon can say the same thing and everyone would hold him up to the status of God.
How many RCT's are there for Surgery?
In regards to bribery, although everyone seems to be in denial of this there was a very high profile case last year where a Pharmaceutical company was fined billions of dollars as they were found guilty of doing exactly that, giving physicians financial incentives to prescribe their drugs.
At uni there were a couple of drug reps on the course. Lots of medical equipment was aquired for free via these guys Ok No one got a holiday but not having to purchase an opthalmo-scope saved a few of us hundreds of pounds which would have gone towards a holiday or more often alcohol comsumption:o)
Answer:
your suspicions are well founded. it has been stated that prescription drugs are the leading cause of death in the united states. there is no doubt that they cause disease, just read the warnings they’re forced to include on their containers. doctors have long received all sorts of “gifts” from drug companies. a current newspaper article told of one physician who showed an enlarged copy of a ten thousand dollar check he received from a major pharmaceutical company as a “consulting fee”. as to the testing of medicines, sixty minutes did a story on how fda drug testers were pressured by their superiors to write favorable reviews of drugs, despite knowing they had discovered problems with them. many reviews of drugs printed in medical journals are actually ghost written by drug company employees and signed as if authored by doctors. very often medicine accuses others of what it is guilty of.
Answer:
your statement does have concrete basis. I work at a Psychiatric Hospital and older workers have informed me that drug companies use to use the patients as test patients for new medications.
Also we’ve here in Baton Rouge, LA Pennington clinic. Citizens can go there and be part of experiemental drugs with compensation - $$$$$$.
convention medicine works because they put EVERYONE to sleep so it's a BIG Bandage on the illness, not healing or Curing.
Answer:
good point. i believe if we audit doctors and dentists who vigorously push and advocate the safety of certain medicine and fluoridation of water, we have the ability to find the money trail.
it takes millions of dollars to have a drug tested and drug production costs are not as costly as we pay at the counter. drugs sold at $20 a pill can cost as low as $1 to produce. what most people don't get is that although a drug is considered safe this day by the f d a, by tomorrow it can be recalled as hazardous.
For example, the drug Reglan was used and produced since 1985 and was recalled recently in 2009. it takes a while before the skeptics admit something is wrong.
There's a saying, give a person half a cup of water and if he asks for more, give him the rest. these skeptics don't deserve the truth you know so ideal not to waste your time w/ them.
Answer:
Yes thats correct.Balance is they key.
There’s no direct cash but in SOME countries there is the issue of corruption in a sense where celebrations are thrown or lunches are bought by pharmaceutical reps-that can influence a physicians prescribing choices willingly or unwillingly.
Also there’s the very disturbing problem of Ghostwriting in some medical papers which means a paper has been written & a pharmaceutical company pays a doctor or scientist to put there makes on the paper.
This is outright deception & corruption because it deceives people to believe that that article/study was done by the eg:doctor with his name on it but in factuality he might have had nothing to do with it at all.
The real issue isn’t about Conventional Medicine versus Alternative Medicine like some people in this section feel it is,but its instead about
•scientific or possibility of being scientific vs proven 100% to not be scientific and about
•honestly & transparency vs corruption in all fields.
Fortunately many in the medical Industry do see this.
Your correct,balance is always needed.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/18/busine…
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/18/busine…
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE58…
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/feature…
http://healthy-center.org/bitter-medicin…
http://healthyskepticism.org/harm.php
http://au.todaytonight.yahoo.com/article…
http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info…
Edit:yes Flizbap they should.As i said,across the board.
Edit:Why the 8 thumbs down but no one disputing what i wrote & the evidence i have gave?
I thought we liked evidence here?
So i would like one of the “thumbsdowners” to provide evidence disputing the facts of what i have stated in my answer.
Did you “thumbsdown” because you didnt like it & didnt want to hear it or did you thumbs down because it wasnt factual?
If because you didnt enjoy it then that means whoever thumbsdown only likes evidence when it suits their preconceived opinions/agenda.
If you thumbsdowned because what i stated wasnt factual them i will wait for your edit providing evidence that all i wrote & all my links arnt truth.
I've got an open mind-if you can prove that all the links are lies then i'm willing to reconsider things in the light of your new evidence however if you cant challenge them with evidence then you’ve to admit that you “thumbsdowned” from emotion & arn't always interested in evidence.