Bhawks--I posted that NY Times link in reply to yo
Post# of 5789
(Total Views: 160)
Posted On: 06/01/2017 3:53:46 PM
Bhawks--I posted that NY Times link in reply to your question,
_____________________________________________________________
"How much in science and medicine....and vaccinations has not improved since 1971?"
______________________________________________________________
I can't peak for the science, by even if it is better, the honesty of the pharma companies and their sources who test their new products has fallen since 1971. Selling the products is now more important than the science, now compared to 1971. Al least, that is what I get from the article. Granted it probably happened to a degree in 1971 too, but to a lesser extent, IMO.
But what the article is a MASSIVE
____________________________________________________________
"In 2011, Bayer pharmaceuticals reported similar reproduction work. Of the 67 projects they conducted to rerun experiments (47 of which involved cancer), only about 25 percent ended with results in line with the original findings."
___________________________________________________________
So, 75% of the studies were wrong, or IMO fraudulent. As I may have posted before, if I run a major university research department and don't give the customer what he wants, my university may not ever get another $1,000,000 study to do. Does big pharma operate that way? My guess is yes, but they do separate themselves fro the integrity of the study?
_____________________________________________________________
"How much in science and medicine....and vaccinations has not improved since 1971?"
______________________________________________________________
I can't peak for the science, by even if it is better, the honesty of the pharma companies and their sources who test their new products has fallen since 1971. Selling the products is now more important than the science, now compared to 1971. Al least, that is what I get from the article. Granted it probably happened to a degree in 1971 too, but to a lesser extent, IMO.
But what the article is a MASSIVE
____________________________________________________________
"In 2011, Bayer pharmaceuticals reported similar reproduction work. Of the 67 projects they conducted to rerun experiments (47 of which involved cancer), only about 25 percent ended with results in line with the original findings."
___________________________________________________________
So, 75% of the studies were wrong, or IMO fraudulent. As I may have posted before, if I run a major university research department and don't give the customer what he wants, my university may not ever get another $1,000,000 study to do. Does big pharma operate that way? My guess is yes, but they do separate themselves fro the integrity of the study?
(0)
(0)