Skip to Content

In science we trust — or do we?

7
ByMaryanne Demasi, Ph.D.August 3, 2019

History is punctuated with evidence of drug companies hiding scientific trial data, leading to litigation, wasting billions on useless medications, and putting lives at risk.

One of the most egregious examples of wrongdoing is the case against GlaxoSmithKline in 2012. The drug manufacturer agreed to pay US$3 billion in fines and pleaded guilty to criminal charges for illegal marketing and failing to report safety data. It was the biggest health-care fraud settlement in U.S. history.

Not surprisingly, a recent analysis showed public trust in pharmaceutical companies has reached a new low. It slumped from 51% to 38%, the biggest drop in five years, with much of it blamed on the opioid crisis, the rising cost of medicines, and companies putting profits ahead of patients.

Scientific research has been plagued by conflicts of interest, data dredging, and bias, leading some researchers to assert that approximately 90% of published research relied upon by doctors is flawed.

It is difficult for people to know what to believe. Single studies often contradict one another, as demonstrated by one analysis that showed many of the foods we eat both cause and prevent cancer, depending on which study you pick.

Confidence in the medical profession also seems to be eroding. A resurgence of measles and low uptake of the vaccine has been attributed to escalating “incredulity and hostility” toward doctors.

This worrying trend stems from the 1980s, when former U.S. President Ronald Reagan slashed government funding to the National Institutes of Health. The change in funding allowed private industry to take over. As a consequence, drug companies now fund the vast majority of human clinical trials.

Marketing firms, sometimes known as “medical communication firms,” are often hired to ghostwrite articles in preparation for peer review, effectively putting a marketing spin on the trial results. This practice has been referred to as “manuscript laundering” and pollutes the medical literature. While these unscrupulous practices may seem unethical, they are entirely legal.

And it is not just industry spin that erodes public trust; our lauded experts are accountable too. For example, it is widely known that statin proponent Sir Professor Rory Collins has publicly stated statins are very well tolerated and myopathy (muscle weakness) occurs in only 1 in 10,000 people taking the drugs.

But The Times U.K. revealed Collins owns a patent on a diagnostic test for statin intolerance, the marketing of which claims that muscle pains from statins are up to 29% (2,900 in 10,000) — a far cry from 1 in 10,000. Collins has tried to distance himself from the debacle, but the manufacturer of the test has stood by the marketing claims.

Further, U.K. Professor Colin Baigent, who advocates the wider use of statins, has recently made several claims in the media suggesting “everyone over the age of 75 should be considered for a statin” because “statin drugs benefit all ages with minimal risk” and giving statins to the elderly “could save up to 8,000 lives a year.”

The only problem is that Baigent’s own data does not support these claims. An analysis he co-authored instead showed statins do not reduce death from vascular disease in people over the age of 70. More surprising, when Baigent was called out in the BMJ for his misleading claims, he remained defiant and would not recant his comments.

In an age when fake news is virtually indistinguishable from fact, we should expect a higher standard from researchers who are speaking from the pulpit of eminent institutions and universities. Otherwise, public trust in science will continue to diminish.


Additional Reading


Dr. Maryanne Demasi is a well-known investigative journalist whose work on scientific documentaries has been praised by the National Press Club of Australia for exhibiting “excellence in health journalism.”

Demasi earned a Ph.D. in rheumatology from the University of Adelaide in 2004. She currently works as a researcher for the Nordic Cochrane Centre.

Comments on In science we trust — or do we?

Comments 7

Sort By

Adi TothAugust 4th, 2019 at 10:41 am

Whoa! Who the heck at CrossFit is posting this crap? This woman is a quack with a very checkered past. So biased and inaccurate

Mark BuecheAugust 4th, 2019 at 12:36 pm

Hello headquarters, You would do well to research the background of you critical experts before publishing. (Hum, is this rush to publish??!!) The whole article claims the problems back to the Reagan administration?? She’s fishing in some very murky waters especially considering that she and most of your target audience weren’t born in 1980. Convenient decade to place blame.

Holden MacRaeAugust 4th, 2019 at 7:13 pm

Correctly stated Mark. NIH appropriations have increased since 1980 - see here. https://nexus.od.nih.gov/all/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/Graph21.jpg

Terry McCarthyAugust 4th, 2019 at 2:48 pm

Seriously? With the roll out of Obama Care, its 4 billion dollar scandal, that periods rush to embrace pharmaceutical companies campaign money ,securing that money by "quick" drug approvals, the 400 plus doctors/nurses indicted for fraud, the bloated costs, etc.. and you still want to blame the companies practices because of Reagan? President Obama attempted to have STATINS put in all public drinking water to "help reduce heart disease" ( and you thought it was the companies who pose a threat) So the problems take decades to show.....that's downright terrifying. If Obama Care was this bad that fast, I shudder to imagine its effects in another decade. The government and its hired self-serving health care "professionals" (that's you, "Dr." Maryanne Demasi, a health care "professional" that I have no confidence in) need to go away. The government has no business running health care. The government is not really good at anything and the less government the better. The irony of a health care professional calling "wolf" on Reagan, health care professionals and then blaming the free market. And which socialist system is YOUR favorite, "Doctor"?

pune shubhamAugust 7th, 2019 at 10:46 am

https://www.sevenmentor.com/angularjs-training-in-pune.php Evolution of such Web technologies in last decade has not just been remarkable but also very fruitful. AngularJS then is one of the most popular and widespread used JavaScript framework. AngularJS is used to make Single Page Applications (SAPs). Single Page Applications are going to be the future and it will definitely lead you towards a bright future, future scope of it is vast so just go in for training. AngularJS is already being extensively used by lot of companies which makes evolution of Web technologies in last decade is quite remarkable. It is one of the most popular and widely accepted JavaScript framework. It is used highly to develop Single Page Applications (SAPs). This type of applications are the future and which will definitely lead you toward a bright future, AngularJS is readily being used by companies and will be used highly again in future too. AngularJS is very easily expandable with basic Knowledge of HTML, CSS & JavaScript and can learn AngularJS provided that you will get proper guidance from knowledgeable experienced teacher.

Embriette HydeAugust 10th, 2019 at 7:31 pm

I was excited to read this but disappointed to find a rather shallow, one-sided exploration of the problem, which has several contributing factors. I really enjoyed this article (https://www.sciencenews.org/article/public-trust-scientists-work-good-society-growing) posted on sciencenews.org that discusses why the public trust in scientists is surprisingly high (and on the rise) yet their faith in scientific transparency is low. Pressures to receive funding, meet publication goals, not get scooped, etc. all contribute to the problem on the scientist's side. The need to get clicks, reads, make more people see adds, build CVs, etc. contribute to the problem on the journalist's side. We all need to hold each other accountable. Overall, CrossFit Health is doing a great job uncovering the dirty secrets of one of the biggest contributors (i.e. mammoth companies and industries like Coca Cola or big sugar) -- but still, it is only one. Let's work to hold not just food and drug companies, but academic researchers, science journalists, and the general public itself accountable, too.

sandeep hachOctober 29th, 2019 at 3:21 am

can't believe this is happening http://www.hachtechnologies.com