Wednesday, September 1, 2010
Conflict of Interest in CIHR
Thanks to Joan Beal, here is some interesting information that may shed some light on CIHR's recommendation to, basically, do nothing about clinical trials for CCSVI treatment in Canada: http://www.facebook.com/pages/CCSVI-in-Multiple-Sclerosis/110796282297#!/notes/ccsvi-in-multiple-sclerosis/dr-alain-beaudet-and-the-pharmaceutical-industy-what-you-need-to-know/430286607210. She makes a good case for concern that some of the head folks in CIHR are a little too cozy with major drug companies. In that light, the CIHR recommendation seems to make more sense in a sinister kind of way... certainly it would appear to constitute a conflict of interest. This would make a great story for a muckraker... any journalists out there that aren't afraid to take this on?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
If you look closely at the CIHR statement, you will notice that they cite the only three studies that have shown no correlation between CCSVI and MS - all of which have been criticized for poor methodology. They then use vague innuendo to downplay the large BNAC study that supported the connection, and ignored the 25+ other studies that also support it. A good collection can be found at:
ReplyDeletehttp://csvi-ms.net/en/content/publications-venous-multiple-sclerosis
Looks like propaganda to me.
Even so, I cannot understand how the MS Society of Canada can possibly believe that a two year delay in trials of the treatment is in the best interest of people living with MS. We have told Yves Savoie what we think, and to take us off their membership list.