Sunday Express: 'New laws could see scientists face CRIMINAL charges for research fraud'

[Sasha]

Finally! I've never understood why people putting out misleading medical research shouldn't go to jail.

SCIENTISTS who carry out fraudulent medical research would face criminal charges under new laws being considered by MPs.

The proposal is among a raft of measures to tackle drug company fraud being examined by a Commons committee.

Members have been told that misleading claims about the effectiveness of drugs have led to patients dying.

Whistleblowers have also received death threats. Norman Lamb, chairman of the Science and Technology Select Committee, has written to each UK university to ask them to ensure staff who expose misconduct are protected.

The all-party committee has received testimony claiming prominent academics are paid large sums of money to publish false data.

Consultant cardiologist Dr Peter Wilmshurst, who submitted evidence to the report, said: “If someone was to falsify data about aircraft performance and planes started crashing they would likely face a criminal prosecution. But falsifying data about drugs is highly unlikely to lead to a sanction, even if it kills people."

“The real scandal is the extent of this problem is covered up by senior people in the profession and major institutions.

“Regulators deal with it ineffectively even when people repeatedly offend but they do not seem to understand misconduct can lead to deaths of patients. It’s absolutely outrageous.”...

Click through, give them the traffic, read the rest, comment: https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/8...nal-charges-fraudulent-medical-drugs-research

 

[chrisb]

What a surprise that, with all the talk of death threats, this story is not being seriously pursued by the SMC. Sounds right up their street.

 

[arewenearlythereyet]

Hopefully this will eventually lead to some prosecutions.

 

[TiredSam]

Hopefully it won't just be confined to pharmaceuticals.

 

[arewenearlythereyet]

Hopefully the guideline or whatever can be written into all university ethical standards of conduct and disciplinary procedures for all academic staff. Probably will need some sort of oversight to enforce...can't have these professors regulating themselves.

 

[Allele]

We need courageous insiders to speak up en masse so we can watch the dominos fall, Weinstein-style.
(somehow typing this gave me the unwelcome mental image of Harvey doing the Gangnam dance )

 

[Trish]

Unfortunately I suspect this won't apply to the BPS crowd. They do badly designed research and draw unjustified conclusions from it, but as far as I know they don't invent the data or get their sums wrong. They even say blatantly that they have moved the goal posts (recovery criteria), so can't be accused of hiding this.

 

[Sasha]

Unfortunately I suspect this won't apply to the BPS crowd. They do badly designed research and draw unjustified conclusions from it, but as far as I know they don't invent the data or get their sums wrong. They even say blatantly that they have moved the goal posts (recovery criteria), so can't be accused of hiding this.

I agree it's unlikely to immediately apply but I think it's a step in the right direction.

 

[large donner]

Less drugs and more CBT?

 

[Barry]

Hopefully it won't just be confined to pharmaceuticals.

That's what I was thinking.

 

[Barry]

Unfortunately I suspect this won't apply to the BPS crowd. They do badly designed research and draw unjustified conclusions from it, but as far as I know they don't invent the data or get their sums wrong. They even say blatantly that they have moved the goal posts (recovery criteria), so can't be accused of hiding this.

That's what I was fearing.

 

[Alvin]

This is a good idea, but the execution is the thing, done badly it could be worse then our present situation and thats terrifying

 

[Wonko]

This is a good idea, but the execution is the thing, done badly it could be worse then our present situation and thats terrifying

I'm all in favour of badly done execution, when called for, just as long as it's ultimately effective.

 

[Alvin]

I'm all in favour of badly done execution, when called for, just as long as it's ultimately effective.

You realize this could mean people doing real science could be jailed for going against the "established" narrative. Sending Fluge/Mella and Dr Davis to jail because Ester was making claims years before they got involved in ME/CFS research for example would be insane. The law can be used for evil.

 

[Wonko]

It frequently is, and always has been, people generally misunderstand the purpose of the law.

People have always been penalised, sometimes with loss of reputation, sometimes with loss of liberty, sometimes with loss of livelihood and sometimes with loss of life, for going against authority and their "views". Whilst here, in more recent times, things have not been so harsh, haven't needed to be when people can be silenced by simply cutting their funding, things may be changing again.

It's not good, I don't agree with it, it's just the way things operate, for those without sufficient power or influence.

This is the world, this is what people do.

 

[Alvin]

It frequently is, and always has been, people generally misunderstand the purpose of the law.

People have always been penalised, sometimes with loss of reputation, sometimes with loss of liberty, sometimes with loss of livelihood and sometimes with loss of life, for going against authority and their "views". Whilst here, in more recent times, things have not been so harsh, haven't needed to be when people can be silenced by simply cutting their funding, things may be changing again.

It's not good, I don't agree with it, it's just the way things operate, for those without sufficient power or influence.

This is the world, this is what people do.

And thats my point, making bad laws that liars and reality deniers can use against legitimate scientists is counter productive. You can't improve things by making them worse

 

[Adrian]

Unfortunately I suspect this won't apply to the BPS crowd. They do badly designed research and draw unjustified conclusions from it, but as far as I know they don't invent the data or get their sums wrong. They even say blatantly that they have moved the goal posts (recovery criteria), so can't be accused of hiding this.

Also a lot of the rules apply to drug trials only so trials of other interventions such as CBT are not as heavily regulated.

 

[EzzieD]

Also a lot of the rules apply to drug trials only so trials of other interventions such as CBT are not as heavily regulated.

And if forcing ever-increasing exercise onto patients who have exertion intolerance as their main defining symptom isn't regulated (which I'm guessing isn't regulated at all, never mind heavily), it jolly well should be!

 

[Valentijn]

And if forcing ever-increasing exercise onto patients who have exertion intolerance as their main defining symptom isn't regulated (which I'm guessing isn't regulated at all, never mind heavily), it jolly well should be!

Ahh, but exercise intolerance doesn't exist in psychiatry, ergo it must not exist at all :

. . . it is difficult to think of a pathological mechanism by which gradual increased activity could be harmful, even in the minority of patients with clear cut neuromuscular pathology.
Wessely S, David A, Butler S, Chalder T. Management of the post-viral fatigue sydrome. British Journal of General Practice, Feb 1990, 82-83

Obviously there are many doctors and other practitioners (at least in the ME/CFS sphere) who aren't aware of mitochondrial or other muscular diseases where increases in activity, especially at the wrong time, can do a great deal of damage. A couple examples are muscle fibers being destroyed and causing kidney failure, or generating excessive lactic acid which accumulates in the CNS and causes seizures and brain damage. And then there's even more obvious problems, such as exercising with diabetes when ketones are elevated due to high blood sugar, or exercising when blood pressure is badly elevated, or even exercising when you have the damned flu

There's really no excuse for quacks to be claiming that even mild exercise is always beneficial.

 

[Hoopoe]

Yay, hurray! Good news. This was overdue. Now please come up with a clear definition of research fraud that includes things like the PACE trial. There must be at least the realistic possibility of serious consequences for researchers that promote their brand of therapy by falsely describing severely disabled people as having gotten "back to normal".