Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Install the app
Install
Reply to Thread
Guest, we'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the
Diabetes Forum Survey 2024 »
Home
Forums
Diabetes Management
Alternative Treatments
Alternative con artists
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Oldvatr" data-source="post: 1265099" data-attributes="member: 196898"><p>I was able to review some of the statistical analysis used to justify the use of some medications in modern medicine, and although I am not a professor or a statistics guru, I do know enough to detect when the data does not stack up. I did this off my own bat, but I note that many others have also drawn the same conclusions. In a major step, the analyical method used (PETO) has been discounted since 2006 and cannot be used any more. but the original findings based on that analysis has not been rescinded, and we are still left with snake oil being peddled by the drug companies, even though the science they use is proven to be totally made up. So who are the charlatans now?</p><p></p><p>Long before they were banned, I had concluded that Actos and Avandia trials data had been misrepresented, and that there was a higher risk of CVE from them. I also concluded that the trials used to justify statin use were incorrectly interpreted and reported. So I do not trust the so called independance of the scientific data formulated by the drug companues and the learned comittees that they use to rubber stamp their reports. We saw this recently where a report in the news said one thing, but omitted to add the register of interests data that clearly showed most of those involved in writing the report were paid or employed directly by interested parties. This corruption is currently rife in our NHS governance, and they get away with it every time. Thankfully the internet is opening up ways to disseminate this info and it is not so easy to control as the mainstream media appears to be. But there is a lot of **** out there too, and charlatans appear everywhere.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Oldvatr, post: 1265099, member: 196898"] I was able to review some of the statistical analysis used to justify the use of some medications in modern medicine, and although I am not a professor or a statistics guru, I do know enough to detect when the data does not stack up. I did this off my own bat, but I note that many others have also drawn the same conclusions. In a major step, the analyical method used (PETO) has been discounted since 2006 and cannot be used any more. but the original findings based on that analysis has not been rescinded, and we are still left with snake oil being peddled by the drug companies, even though the science they use is proven to be totally made up. So who are the charlatans now? Long before they were banned, I had concluded that Actos and Avandia trials data had been misrepresented, and that there was a higher risk of CVE from them. I also concluded that the trials used to justify statin use were incorrectly interpreted and reported. So I do not trust the so called independance of the scientific data formulated by the drug companues and the learned comittees that they use to rubber stamp their reports. We saw this recently where a report in the news said one thing, but omitted to add the register of interests data that clearly showed most of those involved in writing the report were paid or employed directly by interested parties. This corruption is currently rife in our NHS governance, and they get away with it every time. Thankfully the internet is opening up ways to disseminate this info and it is not so easy to control as the mainstream media appears to be. But there is a lot of **** out there too, and charlatans appear everywhere. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post Reply
Home
Forums
Diabetes Management
Alternative Treatments
Alternative con artists
Top
Bottom
Find support, ask questions and share your experiences. Ad free.
Join the community »
This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn More.…