More LIES about antidepressants, 5 psychiatrists accused of scientific misconduct

[skylark99]

Another expose about Big Pharma and "scientific papers" 'validating' the effectiveness of antidepressents.

1. "Scientific" paper, published in peer-reviewed American Journal of Psychiatry in 2001

2. Manuscript found to be drafted by medical communications company Scientific Therapeutics Information, hired by SmithKline Beecham, now GlaxoSmithKline.

3. The 2001 published 'scientific paper' has been cited in hundreds of medical journal articles, textbooks, and practice guidelines for treatment of depression.

4. Five physicians allowed their names to be appended to a manuscript that was drafted by medical communications company Scientific Therapeutics Information.
Dr. Jay Amsterdam, a psychiatry professor at U.Penn, accused the following Psychiatrists of scientific misconduct:

Dr. Dwight Evans, chair, Psychiatry Department at the U of Pennsylvania

Dr. Gary Sachs, a Harvard Medical School professor

Dr. Laszlo Gyulai, Associate Professor of Psychiatry at U.Penn

Dr. Charles Nemeroff, chair, Psychiatry Department, U of Miami

Dr. Charles Bowden, chair, Psychiatry Department, U of Texas

=======================================

Psychiatrist files ghostwriting complaint against Harvard doctor and four others from White Coat Notes


Mass General, Harvard University Psychiatrist files ghostwriting complaint against Harvard doctor and four others


BOSTON GLOBE
July 12, 2011 6:19 PM

By Liz Kowalczyk, Globe Staff

A University of Pennsylvania psychiatrist filed a complaint with the federal Office of Research Integrity accusing five psychiatrists, including Dr. Gary Sachs of Massachusetts General Hospital, of scientific misconduct.

Dr. Jay Amsterdam, a psychiatry professor at U.Penn., said that the five physicians allowed their names to be appended to a manuscript that was drafted by medical communications company Scientific Therapeutics Information, hired by SmithKline Beecham, now GlaxoSmithKline. The paper, he said in his July 8 letter to federal officials, misrepresented information from a research study on the antidepressant drug Paxil.

The manuscript was published in the American Journal of Psychiatry in 2001, and has been cited in hundreds of medical journal articles, textbooks, and practice guidelines. Amsterdam said the paper suggested that Paxil may be beneficial in the treatment of bipolar depression, without acknowledging the medical communication company’s contribution or the extent of GSK’s involvement.

E-mails that Amsterdam included with his complaint letter draw a picture of a political battle between Amsterdam and one of the paper’s authors, Dr. Laszlo Gyulai, associate professor of psychiatry at U.Penn, but also suggest that Scientific Therapeutics was deeply involved in publication of the research.

Amsterdam, who enrolled patients for the study, accused Gyulai of “misappropriating” his data and publishing it without his knowledge.

The e-mails between Amsterdam and several colleagues at U.Penn. also say, for example, that the medical communications company decided who would be the first author of the paper and that many participants “never had a chance to review or even just see the manuscript before it went to press.’’

Many leading medical centers and medical schools, including Mass. General and Harvard, have policies prohibiting researchers from lending their names to papers that are “ghostwritten’’ by industry.

The doctors Amsterdam names are: Dr. Dwight Evans, chairman of the psychiatry department at the University of Pennsylvania; Sachs, a Harvard Medical School professor; Gyulai; Dr. Charles Nemeroff, chairman of the psychiatry department at the University of Miami; and Dr. Charles Bowden, chairman of the psychiatry department at the University of Texas.

U.Penn. said it will investigate the allegations.

Harvard Medical School spokeswoman Gina Vild declined to comment.

The Office of Research Integrity did not return calls from the Globe asking whether it will investigate the complaint.

Sachs said in an e-mailed statement that he was “perplexed” by the allegations. “These allegations are simply inconsistent with my experience and the finding of the study,” he wrote. “When the data became available, I went to Philadelphia to help Dr Gyulai draft the manuscript. We started with a blank page. We passed several iterations between us and then to the other authors.”

He added that the manuscript was peer-reviewed and published in a high quality journal, and that the primary finding was that “neither of the antidepressants added benefit beyond that of lithium alone. It is this finding that is so frequently cited in the scientific literature.”

Liz Kowalczyk can be reached at - kowalczyk at globe dot com

[Janice]

From all the reading I have been doing lately, universities are very much funded by different companies.

Of course, the results will be skewed in favor of the " big Daddy " company.
These guys are whores.
Greed is king!
If you don't think this is what is going on with our particular case...check out the Mayo clinic *** hole that said we are delusional. I can't even call him doctor.

Thank you so much for this news release sky lark.
Good work.

[Janice]

I am sending an email to this medical reporter. Just trying to make some noise, we must be heard
.

[skylark99]

Since the American Journal of Psychiatry is a peer-reviewed journal.............

it beggars belief that AJP, nor any of the "peers' who reviewed the paper, did not investigate the accuracy of the data and the research before publishing the "paper".

This certainly calls into question the reliability of any past or present articles published by the American Journal of Psychiatry......... and the credibility and qualifications of all the "peers" who review articles prior to publication!!

There also seems an urgent need to put mechanisms in place that verify the source of any 'medical' or 'scientific' papers, studies, or research published in any journal..... this instance is not the first time I have read that pharmaceutical companies have been inappropriately linked to drug research. Remember Vioxx?

There is nothing about psychiatry that has actually been scientifically proven. That is has been labeled a "science" is misleading and unfounded.

But look: here is a site (first link) that lists clinical trials of new medicines, therapies, and research into diseases and conditions.

The second link shows just how many NEW clinical trials are being conducted on new antidepressants (65, the majority of them studies of antidepressants) .

Compare the number of those trials with the number of trials in (for instance) endocrinology (16 trials).

Clinical Trial Listings By Medical Condition | CenterWatch

Depression (Major/Severe) Clinical Research Trials | CenterWatch

[skylark99]

The The Office of Research Integrity should investigate Dr. Jay Amsterdam's complaint.

The American Journal of Psychiatry should now review and verify all data, research and authorship of all past articles appearing in their pubication. INCLUDING any ties with any pharmaceutical companies, or author's possible conflicts of interest regards associations or data obtained from pharmaceutical companies.

[Janice]

Email sent to Liz kowalczyk .
Asking for help in getting the CDC to release their findings.

[Janice]

I sent an email to the office of research integrity, about the *** hole at the mayo clinic. They probably won't read it but I feel better.
I did include the article and also where his findings were released in a peer review article , at the same time the CDC reported their findings were in.
I think there is a lot of fire behind his smoke.$$$$$$$$$$

[Janice]

Sorry, I just noticed you had this thread under anti- depressants.
I just got so hot from the lack of integrity of these guys.
Sorry to go so way off topic.

[tcmgpt13]

I guess this is what happens when values such as honesty and integrity are no longer considered to be important by many people in the world today. It is hard to understand how one person might deliberately inflict physical pain and unsightly scars along with emotional suffering on patients who entrusted him with their lives. I wonder if there were any who did not make it off the table alive when such allegedly unnecessary surgery was performed? What makes it unimaginable is this man is supposed to be a world-renowned heart surgeon. Unbelievable. It appears avarice is found everywhere these days. I thought to add this here as it follows the fraud theme found in the medical arena these days, not the first and most likely not the last:

World-Renowned Heart Surgeon’s License Revoked For Performing Hundreds Of Unnecessary Surgeries Friday July 15, 2011 6:22 AM Matzav website:

He’s accused of performing unnecessary surgical procedures on hundreds of his patients. And now many of those patients are celebrating news that state yanked Dr. Marc Midei’s medical license.

Derek Valcourt has reaction to the decision by the Maryland Board of Physicians.

Many of Midei’s patients are calling this vindication. And for their attorneys filing civil lawsuits, it’s more ammunition.

The 88 page report from the Maryland Board of Physicians blasts Dr. Marc Midei for violations they call repeated, serious and indefensible. So severe-they revoked Midei’s medical license.

“That’s what I was hoping for,” said Vicki Marrs. “Happy. He doesn’t deserve to have his license.”

Marrs is one of 585 people who received a letter from St. Joseph Medical Center saying Midei may have unnecessarily given her a stent-a tiny device designed to open up blocked arteries. A charge Midei has vehemently denied.

“What I did is what I would have wanted for myself for anybody in my family, my mother, my father,” Dr. Midei said in October of 2010.

But the State Board of Physicians found in 4 of the 5 patients cases they reviewed, Midei willfully fabricated information about the severity of blockages.

Marrs says Midei lied about how blocked her arteries were too.

“Dr. Midei said it was 90 percent and after they reviewed everything it was 10 percent,” Marrs said.

Midei and his lawyer declined to comment on the license revocation, but attorneys for St. Joseph patients say this is good news for their lawsuits.

Attorney Jay Miller says the board of physicians’ findings will bolster the 181 lawsuits his firm alone has already filed against Midei and St. Joseph Medical Center.

“It’s proof that everything I’ve said is true that Midei was committing fraud and putting stents in patients that didn’t need them,” Miller said.

Marrs wants to win her lawsuit, but feels Midei’s punishment should be more than financial.

“I’d like to see him do some jail time,” Marrs said.

Some of the hundreds of lawsuits against Midei could be heard as early as next spring. Attorneys and judges are trying to figure out how they can try dozens of cases at one time so they don’t bog down the court system.

Midei has 30 days to file an appeal of the decision to revoke his medical license. The board of physicians says he can try to reapply for his license in another two years.

[skylark99]

That WAS an appropriate post to add to this thread, TC. I am gad you did.
What this article states really upsets me.

And I am not impressed or appeased that Midei can try to re-apply for his license in two years. He should have his license permanently revoked, and not be allowed to practice medicine or work in any related health field in all 50 states.
Harsh, maybe. But doctors must practice to the highest of standards.

There seems so much medical fraud among doctors in recent times.
Carelessness, incompetence or money always seem mentioned in these cases.

I know what you mean; used to be your family doctor was someone you trusted, someone you counted on to take care of you and help you when you or a family member was ill. Someone you knew would do the right thing.

I am beginning to think that ALL doctors should be required, as part of their licensing requirements (or medical board registration), to undergo annual psychiatric evaluation. The number of doctors reported to have made inexplicable blunders, unnecessary treatments or surgeries, etc, is boggling.

On the theme of patient trust in their physician, I recently came across a website purporting to "rate" doctors. It turned out that the rating was not actually done by patients who had consulted these doctors or had been treated by them, but rather by a panel of other doctors.
I wrote to the owner of the website, and inquired about this obvious good ol' boys club and asked why patients comments and recommendations were not used in the rating system.
The reply was (succinctly) that patients are not qualified to rate doctors.

This problem isn't new, but maybe in the news more. Or more doctors are getting caught.
I remember as a teen, seeing a dentist.
I had never had any trouble with my teeth, but suddenly (I was told) I had numerous cavities. Over 18 months, this dentist put in 11 fillings.

About a decade later, I saw a new dentist in a new town I moved to.
He said that x-rays showed that all my filings were flat on the bottom, indicating that my teeth had simply been drilled out and filled with amalgam fillings. He said it was what they formerly called 'preventative dentistry'.
But he also went onto say that it should not have been done, and too, that he knew of my former dentist, and that the man had had a severe back injury and could no longer practice dentistry.
Sometimes, there is justice in the world.

I hope the patients that Midei abused find it.