Get Started for FREE
Sign up with Facebook Sign up with X
I don't have a Facebook or a X account
 Your new post is loading...
Your new post is loading...
Scoop.it!
Si chiama disease mongering ovvero la mercificazione della malattia. La salute è da sempre un grande business e non solo per le aziende farmaceutiche. Così succede che per allargare il mercato si creano nuovi clienti, facendo dei sani i nuovi malati. Quali sono le tattiche del disease mongering : La medicalizzazione di eventi naturali, come... Continue reading → 
No comment yet.
Sign up to comment
Scoop.it!
Coke paid health experts to promote its mini-cans as a healthy snack option during American Heart Month in February, raising concerns among those fighting obesity rates in the U.S.
Scoop.it!
John Oliver outlines what, exactly is problematic about Dr. Oz and the nutrition supplement industry. Then he invites George R.R. Martin, Steve Buscemi, the ...
Scoop.it!
This story appeared in Google Alerts: "People in the US Hate Big Pharma, Study Finds." At first, my reaction was Duh! Nothing to see here, considering all the pushback from physicians and other stakeholders (including patients?) regarding high drug prices. Via Pharma Guy
Scoop.it!
CancerIntercept costs $699 and is marketed as an early warning system for people who are at high risk of developing cancer. A startup which claims to offer a blood test that detects cancer before symptoms appear has been slapped down by America's drug watchdog. It says there is no evidence at all that it works, and warns that the "high risk" test may actually harm public health. For example, someone could wrongly be diagnosed with cancer and attempt to undergo unnecessary surgery. In a letter to Pathway Genomics' chief executive Jim Plante, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) wrote: "We have examined published literature and have not found any published evidence that this test or any similar test has been clinically validated as a screening tool for early detection of cancer in high risk individuals.
Scoop.it!
Coca-Cola has become the first brand to pay for an emoji on Twitter, with a picture of two Coke bottles clinking coming up when a user types #shareacoke.
Scoop.it!
As the US debates drug policy reforms and marijuana legalization, there's one aspect of the war on drugs that remains perplexingly contradictory: Some of the most dangerous drugs in the US are legal. Don't believe it? The available data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) shows tobacco, alcohol, and opioid-based prescription painkillers were responsible for more direct deaths in one year than any other drug. The chart above compares those drug deaths with the best available data for cocaine, heroin, and marijuana deaths.
Scoop.it!
A study which was cited by public health officials when they advised that vaping was safe, was funded by the e-cigarette industry, it has emerged.
Scoop.it!
Sugar. It's in everything! Is it good for us? Well, the sugar industry thinks so. Connect with Last Week Tonight online... Subscribe to the Last Week Tonight...
Scoop.it!
Grist asked: "Hey Risk Bites guy, the WHO just said that the herbicide in Roundup probably causes cancer -- what's the deal with that? It seems like every mo...
Scoop.it!
The money spent to influence doctors tends to be in the service of newer drugs that are “fairly redundant.” For more than five decades, the blood thinner Coumadin was the only option for millions of patients at risk for life-threatening blood clots. But now, a furious battle is underway among the makers of three newer competitors for the prescription pads of doctors across the country. The manufacturers of these drugs — Pradaxa, Xarelto and Eliquis — have been wooing physicians in part by paying for meals, promotional speeches, consulting gigs and educational gifts. In the last five months of 2013, the companies spent nearly $19.4 million on doctors and teaching hospitals, according to ProPublica’s analysis of federal data released last fall
Scoop.it!
From
nj
The state grand jury handed up the indictments against the four doctors and one chiropractor this morning. The medical practitioners were accused of taking kickbacks from Rehan Zuberi. Zuberi, 46, of Boonton, pleaded guilty last month to charges that he led a criminal enterprise that paid several million dollars of bribes and kickbacks to dozens of doctors from 2008 to 2014. The plea agreement calls for Zuberi to receive a 10-year state prison sentence with a four-year non-parole eligibility stipulation.
Scoop.it!
Thanks to tobacco industry regulations and marketing restrictions in the US, smoking rates have dropped dramatically. John Oliver explains how tobacco compan...
|
Scoop.it!
Pharmaceutical companies spend billions of dollars marketing drugs to doctors. We have a few issues with that. Connect with Last Week Tonight online... Subsc...
Scoop.it!
Before 2005, I did pay attention to the antivaccine movement, but it wasn’t one of my biggest priorities when it comes to promoting science-based medicine. That all changed when Robert F. Kennedy published his incredibly conspiracy-packed black whole of antivaccine pseudoscience entitled Deadly Immunity. Sadly, almost exactly ten years later, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. hasn’t…
Scoop.it!
From
time
Too much chemo. Too much radiation. And way too many mastectomies “What if I decide to just do nothing?” It was kind of a taunt, Desiree Basila admits. Not the sort of thing that usually comes out of the mouth of a woman who’s just been diagnosed with breast cancer. For 20 minutes she’d been grilling her breast surgeon. “Just one more question,” she kept saying, and her surgeon appeared to her to be growing weary. She was trying to figure out what to do about her ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), also known as Stage 0 breast cancer, and she was already on her second opinion. The first surgeon had slapped a photograph of her right breast onto a viewer, pointed to a spot about 5 cm long and 2.5 cm wide and told her there was a slot open the following week for a mastectomy.
Scoop.it!
Posticipato di un anno l’obbligo di dotare dello strumento i luoghi dove si fa sport. L’allarme del cardiologo Cecchini. «Nel prossimo anno circa 150 pisani potrebbero andare incontro a morte improvvisa». Una strage annunciata su cui pesa, secondo il cardiologo Maurizio Cecchini, la decisione della Regione Toscana di posticipare di un anno l'entrata in vigore dell'obbligo di dotare di defibrillatori semiautomatici (Dae) tutti i luoghi dove si pratica sport.
Scoop.it!
From
www
Marketing is what you do when your product is no good, said Edward Land, scientist and inventor of the Polaroid instant camera. The same notion filled Tom Jefferson’s head when he began to reappraise his initial conclusions about neuraminidase inhibitors and the risk of influenza complications and hospital admissions (doi:10.1136/bmj.g2227). Keiji Hayashi, a Japanese researcher, alerted him to the existence of unpublished trials, trials that were not included in his Cochrane review of 2006. From trusting the literature, researchers, and companies, Jefferson moved to a position of deep scepticism. Many trials were unpublished, data weren’t shared, and decisions on purchasing, stockpiling, and using the drugs were based on a slim and skewed representation of the total evidence base. This week is the culmination of a five year campaign led by Jefferson’s Cochrane research team, supported by The BMJ, to ensure the release of the full clinical trial data on neuraminidase inhibitors (doi:10.1136/bmj.g2630). The studies, analyses, and editorials in this issue strike like a hammer blow. Oseltamivir (Tamiflu) has generated sales in excess of $18bn (£11bn; €13bn) for Roche since 1999, something more than the “nice little earner” that a City of London financial analyst described it as (doi:10.1136/bmj.g2524). The United States stockpiled 65 million treatments for a cost of $1.3bn. The United Kingdom spent £424m on a stockpile of 40 million doses. By 2009, 96 countries possessed enough osteltamivir for 350 million people. GlaxoSmithKline’s drug zanamivir (Relenza) was less successful but still generated sales in the region of $2bn.
Scoop.it!
From
www
According to a linked article by Holleman and colleagues,1 diabetes research is dominated by a few dozen prolific researchers, a handful so productive that they were designated “supertrialists.” Holleman and colleagues examined randomised controlled trials of glucose lowering drugs published in the 20 years up to 2013, and found that roughly a third (32.4%) of reports were published by less than 1% (110 of 13 592) of authors. The most prolific individuals were named on seven trial reports, on average, every year for the last 10 years. Holleman and colleagues’ study did not determine how many separate trials were reported by these articles, but even assuming that large trials generate several publications, they found that some authors had an extraordinary output. In a similar study of prolific authors,2 the 10 most productive in each of four medical specialties were named on at least one publication per 10 working days each year, showing that the issue is not restricted to diabetes research. Making a meaningful contribution to both the research and publication processes, as required by authorship criteria from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE),3 involves a serious investment of time. Is it possible to fulfil a strict interpretation of the ICMJE authorship criteria and report findings from a trial every other month? This might be possible for certain contributions that are not particularly time consuming but are intellectually critical to the research and therefore deserving of authorship, for example, providing statistical expertise for a study design and analysis plan. Holleman and colleagues did not investigate the precise contribution of authors, but this would be an interesting area for further study. Furthermore, interpretation of the ICMJE criteria varies. Indeed, we already know that some researchers consider the criteria overly stringent or even unethical.4
Scoop.it!
What if a big TV station came out with a blockbuster story claiming that infant car seats were implicated in cerebral palsy (CP)? After all, something like 99.7% of babies diagnosed with cerebral palsy had been brought home from the hospital in a car seat. In fact, every single time they went anywhere in a car, they were strapped into them. That’s an impressive number. There has to be some connection! Imagine a video of kids crying piteously as they’re buckled into the wretched contraptions. After all, car seats are restraining and uncomfortable. Kids hate them. But parents have been duped into using the damn things claiming it makes their children safer. Pshaw! How could a baby be safer anywhere other than in its mother’s arms?
Scoop.it!
Amazon.com Inc (AMZN.O) said on Tuesday it will begin delivering wine, beer and spirits to U.S. customers for the first time as part of its speedy delivery service, Prime Now.
Scoop.it!
Gianluigi Trianni
Scoop.it!
Pharmaguy interviews Len Starnes, a digital consultant, who critiques a #MICEproject report, which concluded that the pharmaceutical industry uses medical conference hashtags as unregulated 'backchannels' to exert an equal or greater amount of influence than healthcare providers. Background Listen to to the podcast here: http://bit.ly/PMT243 Via Pharma Guy
Giuseppe Fattori's insight:
Questions/Topics of Discussion
Pharma Guy's curator insight,
August 5, 2015 2:15 PM
Questions/Topics of Discussion
What's Your Opinion? Take my survey; https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/TXNCVPC 
Matt Coleman's curator insight,
August 6, 2015 2:48 AM
Questions/Topics of Discussion What sparked this discussion about pharma's use of medical society conference hashtags?The authors of the analysis describe Twitter conference reporting as a "backchannel," implying that it is somehow covert. Is it?Do you agree with the analysis that pharma disproportionately influences HCPs on conference hashtags?Do you support the authors of the analysis that all pharma tweets on conference hashtags constitute "detailing"?Should medical societies try to control conference hashtag use - is it possible or desirable?What exactly are the authors of the analysis proposing?Is self-regulation a better option for the pharma industry?
DebbyBruck's curator insight,
August 6, 2015 4:25 AM
PharmaGuy, "Questions/Topics of Discussion: What sparked this discussion about pharma's use of medical society conference hashtags? The authors of the analysis describe Twitter conference reporting as a "backchannel," implying that it is somehow covert. Is it? Do you agree with the analysis that pharma disproportionately influences HCPs on conference hashtags? Do you support the authors of the analysis that all pharma tweets on conference hashtags constitute "detailing"? Should medical societies try to control conference hashtag use - is it possible or desirable?What exactly are the authors of the analysis proposing?Is self-regulation a better option for the pharma industry?"
Scoop.it!
Flaws in information submitted to Open Payments, a government database of financial relationships in the medical field, complicated our analysis. You'd think drug and medical device makers would know how to spell the names of their own products. But when companies submitted data to the federal governmentlast year on their payments to doctors, some got the product names wrong. Forest Laboratories misspelled its depression drug, Fetzima, as "Fetziima" 953 times — in more than one-third of all the reports on the drug. Medical device company Amedica Corp. sometimes called its Preference screw system "Preferance." Amid much anticipation and after a lengthy delay, the government in September unveiled its Open Payments database, saying it would bring transparency to relationships between physicians and the drug and medical device industries. But this openness has been clouded by numerous errors that detract from its usefulness.
|
