naturalnews.com printable article

Originally published May 26 2005

Medical journals just an advertising outlet for drug companies, says former BMJ editor

by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, NaturalNews Editor

Dr. Richard Smith, editor of the British Medical Journal for 13 years, said the journal is too reliant on drug company advertising to bring in revenue. What is even worse, Smith says, is medical journals publishing industry-funded trials. These trials are often better for drug companies than any advertising, and considered much more credible. However, the results of the trial are rarely negative for the sponsoring drug company. Smith says the only real way to combat the problem is to require publicly funded drug trials. Richard Ley, of the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry, says Smith's accusations were unfounded, and that publicly funded trials are "not realistic."


Medical journals are an extension of the marketing arms of drug firms, says an ex-British Medical Journal editor. Dr Richard Smith, who edited the BMJ for 13 years, criticised the journals' reliance on drug company advertising. Writing in Public Library of Science Medicine, he also said journals were undermined by relying on clinical trials funded by the drugs industry. The BMJ said a debate was needed, but drug industry representatives rejected the criticisms. Dr Smith, who is now chief executive of healthcare firm UnitedHealth Europe, said the most conspicuous example of the dependence was reliance on advertising, but he added it was "the least corrupting form of dependence" since it was there for all to see. Dr Smith said the publication of industry-funded trials was a much bigger problem. "Fortunately from the point of view of the companies which fund these trials - but unfortunately for the credibility of the journals who publish them - they rarely produce results that are unfavourable to the companies' products." He said editors are put under further pressure by the demands of producing a profit. "An editor may thus face a frighteningly stark conflict of interest - publish a trial that will bring in $100,000 (�54,000) of profit, or meet the end of year budget by firing an editor." He said there needed to be more publicly-funded trials - about two thirds are currently paid for by the industry - or journals should stop publishing such trials. "On the one hand we are saying clean up your act, while we are fairly dependent on the advertising for our survival. "What we need now is a debate about the issue." But Richard Ley, of the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry, said his criticisms were unfounded.



All content posted on this site is commentary or opinion and is protected under Free Speech. Truth Publishing LLC takes sole responsibility for all content. Truth Publishing sells no hard products and earns no money from the recommendation of products. NaturalNews.com is presented for educational and commentary purposes only and should not be construed as professional advice from any licensed practitioner. Truth Publishing assumes no responsibility for the use or misuse of this material. For the full terms of usage of this material, visit www.NaturalNews.com/terms.shtml