Lots of health-related sceince news over at Nature Network Boston:
Read the editorial is this special issue of The Spine Journal for the kind of outrage you don’t often see in peer-reviewed publicaitons. Christopher M. Bono, of Brigham & Women’s Hospita,. is one of the authors.
At issue — industry-sponsored scientists who published research on a spinal treatment — but left out the adverse events.
The core of our professional faith,…is to first do not harm. It harms patients to have biased and corrupted research published. It harms patients to have unaccountable special interests permeate medical research. It harms patients when poor publication practices become business as usual.
Yet harm has been done. And that fact creates a basic moral obligation. As John F. Kennedy stated, ‘‘This moral issue is as old as the scriptures and is as clear as the AmericanConstitution.’’ It is the human right in our society to basic protections.
In the spirit of that obligation, upcoming issues of The Spine Journal will describe a number of editorial-,
procedural-, and disclosure-related changes, which we hope will achieve a better balance in critical manuscript review,
conflict of interest disclosure, and publication presentation. We all must do a better job going forward.
Harry Demonaco, who directs the Innovation Support Center at the Massachusetts General Hospital, critiqued the ABC piece fon lung cancer screening results for Health News Review. He did not like it. HNR is the place to go for a reality check on disease screening. In short, we do too much of it and lots of it doesn’t do much.
The study of this form of traditional medicine was funded by two government agencies — NIH and the Ministry of Health & Welfare of the Republic of Korea.