Top Researcher Admits Massive Fraud!, page 1


Pages: <<  1    2    3  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 77 times
Topic started on 18-3-2009 @ 06:21 PM by esecallum
Dr. Scott Reuben, fabricated the data used in over twenty pharmaceutical studies published in peer-reviewed medical journals. Read the full NaturalNews report on this topic here: www.naturalnews.com...

These studies promoted the safety and "benefits" of drugs like Bextra (Pfizer), Vioxx (Merck), Lyrica, Celebrex and Effexor. The lead researcher on these studies, Dr. Scott Reuben, was being paid by Pfizer and Merck, so there's a verified financial connection between this clinical researcher and...

Read all about it at:-


www.naturalnews.com...

Note how the mass media has not mentioned this fraud at all as they get paid to advertise these dangerous fraudulant drugs...


reply posted on 18-3-2009 @ 06:51 PM by GAOTU789
Great find esecallum.

Here is an article by Scientific America on the same subject.

Medical Madoff

"We are talking about millions of patients worldwide, where postoperative pain management has been affected by the research findings of Dr. Reuben," says Steven Shafer, editor in chief of the journal Anesthesia & Analgesia, which published 10 of Reuben's fraudulent papers.

Paul White, another editor at the journal, estimates that Reuben's studies led to the sale of billions of dollars worth of the potentially dangerous drugs known as COX2 inhibitors, Pfizer's Celebrex (celecoxib) and Merck's Vioxx (rofecoxib)


I hope he rots in prison for the rest of his natural life.

[edit on 18-3-2009 by GAOTU789]


reply posted on 18-3-2009 @ 06:59 PM by danielsil18
One of the bad things is that it took 12 years to find out that his data was pure fiction.

This is from an article:

The question is: Why did it take 12 years before a "routine audit" revealed Reuben's widespread data fabrication? "Baystate publishes about 200 [studies] every year, and of those [articles], the audit rate might only be 5 percent," Baystate's Jenson says, acknowledging that ultimately "Baystate is responsible" for making sure that research done there is properly conducted and reported.



It seems we are not as safe as it seems to be.

The question is if something else is also faked and we don't know about it. We might not find out about it until another 12 years.



[edit on 18-3-2009 by danielsil18]



reply posted on 18-3-2009 @ 07:17 PM by elfie
article March 10th in NY Times

www.nytimes.com...


Doctor Admits Pain Studies Were Frauds, Hospital Says

By GARDINER HARRIS
Published: March 10, 2009

In what may be among the longest-running and widest-ranging cases of academic fraud, one of the most prolific researchers in anesthesiology has admitted that he fabricated much of the data underlying his research, said a spokeswoman for the hospital where he works.

The researcher, Dr. Scott S. Reuben, an anesthesiologist in Springfield, Mass., who practiced at Baystate Medical Center, never conducted the clinical trials that he wrote about in 21 journal articles dating from at least 1996, said Jane Albert, a spokeswoman for Baystate Health.

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.




Very disappointing. He should lose his license. I hope he is prosecuted as well.


reply posted on 18-3-2009 @ 07:30 PM by GAOTU789
reply to post by Aggie Man



Aggieman, it wasn't 21 types of meds, it was twenty one studies on the meds mentioned.

Esecallum's second link shows the studies in question.


reply posted on 18-3-2009 @ 07:31 PM by RIPNBYA
reply to post by danielsil18



Your question is certainly intersting. Will they let us have another 12 years to investigate other inadequate agency reporting and qualifing? The crap they've put us through for so long now, has dumbed us down to the point ,we cant get enough people mad enough to really send a message to the their local representatives.
We need to get mad as hell, their poisoning us and killing our children without recourse against themselves.


reply posted on 18-3-2009 @ 07:36 PM by Aggie Man
reply to post by GAOTU789



Thank you! I misunderstood based on the title of the article. Whew!!!


reply posted on 18-3-2009 @ 07:42 PM by RIPNBYA
reply to post by esecallum



Thanks for the information esecallum. I'll be passing these nuggets of information onto the people who are supposed to hear about the criminally inadequate practises, that in a big way get kept out of the main stream media. I'll be calling the local am talk radio station and also be letting my govt rep know that another big pharm company conspiracy theory is out of the bag, again. Of course S&F,thx.



reply posted on 18-3-2009 @ 07:53 PM by ProfEmeritus
The entire peer review process is flawed. I started a thread last year dealing with my concerns with the peer review process. For those interested, the thread is here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Without repeating my arguments about peer review, let me just say that my dealings with it, left me convinced that fraud is rarely caught in the peer review process, unless it is blatant. Fudging data is one of the hardest frauds to catch, without an actual audit of the data capture and experimental modes. I find that fraud frequently gets past the referees, especially when they are paid. In addition, depending upon the field, if it is a very new field or area, finding referees that are appropriate can be a real problem.
Pages: <<  1    2    3  >>    ^^TOP^^



Cooking With Aluminum Foil Should Be Avoided
  Posted 16 days ago with 43 member flags
"US teen invents advanced cancer test using Google"
  Posted 17 days ago with 38 member flags
A virus that kills cancer: the cure that\'s waiting in the cold
  Posted 6 days ago with 21 member flags
Stem cells bring back feeling for paralysed patients
  Posted 7 days ago with 7 member flags
Gruenenthal\'s thalidomide apology \'insulting\'
  Posted 10 days ago with 6 member flags