Scientific Studies Polluted- What and Who Can You Trust? Tdap for Pregnancy? Gardasil?..
In medicine, I feel that now more than ever you need an experienced clinician who has seen a lot, who thinks logically and has a huge dose of common sense. You would think that the availability of the Internet, more research at our finger-tips, more guidelines from our academies, our CDC and NIH, and more research being done at institutions of higher learning than ever before, that we would be in the golden age of medicine. Sadly, it feels we are becoming more influenced by junk science and further removed from common sense than ever before. What makes it so difficult for doctors today, is that so much junk science comes from the pharmaceutical industry that even the guidelines are polluted.
The recent ACOG (American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists) guideline to inject every pregnant mom with the high aluminum content Tdap is just one example, with zero, yes, no studies that are prospective and long-term or the continued recommendation for the Hepatitis B vaccine for newborns who don’t need it from the CDC, ACIP, AAP, and State agencies that would mandate this for your child to go to day care or school, despite plenty of studies showing aluminum is toxic to brain development.
Dr Arthur Caplan published a commentary in the April 3 journal Mayo Clinic Proceedings, “The pollution of science and medicine by plagiarism, fraud, and predatory publishing is corroding the reliability of research…Yet neither the leadership nor those who rely on the truth of science and medicine are sounding the alarm loudly or moving to fix the problem with appropriate energy.” You can read that here… He points out that journals recruit authors who pay to get their articles published allowing for “the unscrupulous in academia and industry to pad their curriculum vitae’s and bibliographies with bogus articles and editorial appointments, they also make it difficult for those involved in the assessment and promotion of scholars to discern value from junk”.
He quotes research misconduct, like falsifying or fabricating data or concealing serious violations. We saw such concealing happen with the Pediatrics 2004 article that claimed no link between autism and the MMR vaccine (read more here… ) but whistle blower Dr. Thompson revealed the data showing the link was excluded after it was found. (You can read more on this here… )
Indeed, it becomes difficult to know what you can trust. Most pharmaceutical products come to market after only research that is funded by those pharmaceutical companies. It is often years or decades later that we learn about the inadequacies of the trials or about actual fraud in the manipulation of data. It’s a common known fact that studies that don’t show what the companies wanted to show, do not get published, so there is an automatic publishing bias for only studies that show benefits of the product in question.
We physicians once demanded rigorous study protocols and meaningful, statistically significant results before we would recommend a new medication or vaccine. Now vaccines as dangerous as the Gardasil- 9 can get CDC and AAP recommendation with brief inadequate studies that highlight real risks, yet those risks seem to be ignored. The company package insert for Gardasil-9 (which you can read here… ) lists 8 pages of side effects including a 23% chance of pregnancy adverse side effects (spontaneous abortions, late fetal demise, and congenital anomalies) and death in 1 of every 1,400 doses given. They did a clever study design of comparing the first dangerous Gardasil-3 vaccine as the control so that when horrible side effects were compared they could say the new one was just as safe as the old one. YES, and JUST AS DANGEROUS! In the case of the Gardasil, some are taking note. Japan’s physicians have removed their recommendation for this vaccine citing dangerous side effects.