Ed Silverman writes:
'You’ve heard of evidence-based medicine. Well, a new paper summarizes a panoply of practices employed over the past two decades or so – ghostwriting, suppressing or spinning data, disease mongering and managing side effect perceptions among docs – that the authors call marketing-based medicine. And they rely on internal documents from litigation – such as the much-publicized lawsuits over antipsychotics and antidepressants – to illustrate their point.
“While much excitement has been generated surrounding evidence-based medicine, internal documents from the pharmaceutical industry suggest that the publicly available evidence base may not accurately represent the underlying data regarding its products,” they write in Bioethical Inquiry (see here). “We propose that while evidence-based medicine is a noble ideal, marketing-based medicine is the current reality…Although many internal industry documents are legally available on the internet, there are as yet few publications in the biomedical literature based primarily on internal industry sources. These internal documents, as well as material drawn from other sources, provide insight into the intersection between marketing and science within the pharmaceutical industry.”'
Via Andrew Spong