Medical science stands at the precipice of either descending into a dark abyss of intractable toxicity or pulling back and committing to a process of resurrection. But nothing short of a complete shakeout and separation of the academic space from commercial interests will cut it. The fundamental tenets of the Nuremberg Code would need to be re-embraced and medical ethics restored if we are to regain the moral high ground and once again conduct ourselves so as to “do no harm”. Additionally we would need to once again engage in unfettered medical scientific discourse, sans divisive and destructive biases.
The ancient philosophers must be looking down upon us with disdain, shaking their heads in disbelief. For we have failed them and all the great contributors to knowledge and science that followed them.
It is true that there has always been present some bias or another in the evolution of knowledge and understanding. Examples of political and religious interference abound along the convoluted path to the Industrial Revolution and the technology which followed. However the overall trend was towards greater enlightenment. Until the latter part of the twentieth century...
Initially the negative influences upon unfettered intellectual inquiry were subtle and barely discernible. But new influences in an increasingly connected world began to emerge towards the end of the last century. The pressure to publish for personal standing and tenure resulted in the “publish or perish” phenomenon with the inevitable flooding of the literature with low quality publications. Heads of department decisions regarding what was “acceptable” to investigate and research further compromised the evolution of knowledge. Playing through this global environment was the ever present confirmation bias – the seeking out of information to substantiate one’s hypothesis. This manifest also in review articles where there was often a subtle selection bias to support the popular perspective. Over the past several years the situation has deteriorated to the point that one has lost confidence in the authenticity of many of the publications. This situation was illustrated recently by an editorial written by the outgoing editor of a neuroscience journal in which he lamented that there had been an 80% increase in retraction of published articles over the preceding five year period!
Enter Big Pharma, Big Money and Big Influence and everything else pales into insignificance. Evidence of manipulation of studies through “bought” medics and suppression of adverse consequences in pre-marketing trials abound. Litigation against this industry became the norm. But before I wax lyrical it is important “not to throw the baby out with the bath water” – there have been great pharmaceutical developments which have saved many lives and improved quality of life. If only this had prevailed as the order of the day. But nope. The big G was relentlessly driving the industry which had become global – GREED and hungry shareholders!
This most unfortunate state of affairs is best described in an article published in the British Medical Journal (BMJ) on the 16th March 2022 by Jureidini and McHenry entitled The illusion of evidence based medicine. I quote the following directly from the article:
“The pharmaceutical industry’s responsibility to its shareholders means that priority must be given to their hierarchical power structures, product loyalty, and public relations propaganda over scientific integrity. Although universities have always been elite institutions prone to influence through endowments, they have long laid claim to being guardians of truth and the moral conscience of society. But in the face of inadequate government funding, they have adopted a neo-liberal market approach, actively seeking pharmaceutical funding on commercial terms. As a result, university departments become instruments of industry: through company control of the research agenda and ghost writing of medical journal articles and continuing medical education, academics become agents for the promotion of commercial products.”
In 2009 a former editor of the New England Journal of Medicine (the NEJM), M Angell, wrote a book entitled Drug Companies & Doctors: A Story of Corruption. Here is a relevant quote from the text:
"It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of the New England Journal of Medicine”
This toxic environment has unfortunately led to the tainting of medical intellectual ethics, morality and authenticity, inclusive of outright intellectual fraud. I take no pleasure in sharing the following illustrative example from the neuroscience terrain that I inhabit:
In 2006 an influential article was published in the prestigious journal Nature on Alzheimer’s Disease. The first author of this highly cited article was Sylvain Lesné of the University of Minnesota. Essentially the authors claimed to have identified a beta amyloid subtype which they indicated led to increased dementia in rats as it accumulated in the brain tissue of afflicted animals. The authors proposed that the discovery of this pathological prion protein (beta amyloid) provided possibilities for developing a drug that would target this protein and provide effective intervention for Alzheimer’s Disease. A drug was subsequently developed called Simufilam by a drug developer named Cassava Sciences.
The original article of 2006 raised the suspicions of several neuroscientists, most notably Matthew Schrag, a neuroscientist and physician at Vanderbilt University. Several scientists had difficulty in identifying the beta amyloid subtype but Schrag had more serious misgivings. Applying his medical and technical expertise he uncovered suspiciously altered images in the original article as well as in several other articles published by the same author. Schrag’s own research also contradicted some of Cassava’s claims. He feared that volunteers in ongoing Simufilam trials faced risks of side effects with no chance of benefit (Sound familiar?).
A 6-month investigation by the journal Science provided strong support for Schrag’s suspicions and raised questions about Lesné’s research. Elisabeth Bik, a molecular biologist and well-known forensic image consultant, reviewed the published images and stated the following: The authors “appeared to have composed figures by piecing together parts of photos from different experiments. The obtained experimental results might not have been the desired results, and that data might have been changed to … better fit a hypothesis.”
This is an ongoing investigation which will have major repercussions in regard to further Alzheimer’s research and drug development.
When Covid burst upon the scene the medical environment was ripe for the picking. Creating the plandemic narrative and capturing the minds and souls of the majority of the profession was a mere walk in the park. The toxic stench got a whole lot worse, to the point that it could no longer be contained. It is now exuding from every nook and cranny for all to see. Perhaps this is what it has taken to finally expose the rot and to contribute to resurrection. I have always maintained that the real pressure group would be the lay public. With increasing awareness of the shenanigans of the profession and those who captured it I believe that we may have arrived at the inflection point. Is this indeed ground zero or does it still need to get a whole lot worse before we turn the page?
Medicine at the precipice
I pray we are truly at a turning point. I can feel the imminent collapse underneath my feet, and not just medicine. The rot is crumbling everywhere. The rats that know who they are continue to play their violins as the ship sinks. I want to see Justice;this was and remains the most evil thing I could imagine to fall upon the world. Doctors losing their soul and the resultant crimes against humanity.
Great post Ian. It is an intriguing question as to whether we've arrived at the inflection point or not and while I'm definitely ready to "turn the page", I don't think those around me are...
Just have to keep chipping away and sharing information, (like this article), with everyone...