5 ms·

I wonder what is BMJ’s agenda? Why do they want that their articles explaining how one contractor botched trial shared on Facebook? Are they saying that it is n

by tlogan 5y ago

I wonder what is BMJ’s agenda? Why do they want that their articles explaining how one contractor botched trial shared on Facebook? Are they saying that it is not true that their article “could mislead people”? And article is like Fox News: “ Revelations of poor practices at a contract research company helping to carry out Pfizer’s pivotal covid-19 vaccine trial raise questions about data integrity and regulatory oversight.” Come on guys… this is definitely “click bite” article where headline really does not match the content l.

HideousKojima 5y ago
>And article is like Fox News: “ Revelations of poor practices at a contract research company helping to carry out Pfizer’s pivotal covid-19 vaccine trial raise questions about data integrity and regulatory oversight.” I mean, shouldn't it? The fact that this was reported to the FDA and they took no further action to investigate makes all of their other efforts suspect.
- NoPie 5y ago
  Or it means that FDA is not doing its job properly. It could be do to lack of manpower or whatever but the fact that the FDA did not inspect the sites in question doesn't mean that the complaint wasn't justified. It just means it wasn't investigated, so no clear conclusions can be made.
  - HideousKojima 5y ago
    >Or it means that FDA is not doing its job properly. So you're saying it "raise[s] questions about... regulatory oversight"?
    - NoPie 5y ago
      It definitely does. There have been many scandals with pharma and regulators. Opioid crisis is one example, even though all involved parties currently blame each other and it has not been established who shares the most guilt yet. In either case, we definitely needed alarming articles about risks from newly marketed opioids 10 years ago. The other worry is the recent approval of aducanumab by the FDA.
NoPie 5y ago
BMJ correspondents understand the industry and see some failures in one of the most important clinical trials for this pandemic. They consider this unacceptable and seeing that regulators haven't really done their job at overseeing this properly, have done some investigation and want to make other healthcare professional aware of this issue so that ultimately it can be properly resolved. The title is very precise and corresponds with the contents very closely. You could say it is a little bit alarmistic though. If it reads like Fox News to you, then you probably don't understand this industry. That's fine but don't call it wrong.
csee 5y ago
Maybe it's not about whether the article can or can't be shared, it's just that they don't want lies to be explicitly told about their article, because that negatively impacts their reputation? For example, the claim of the fact-checkers that the article contains "flaws".

by tlogan 5y ago

HideousKojima 5y ago

>And article is like Fox News: “ Revelations of poor practices at a contract research company helping to carry out Pfizer’s pivotal covid-19 vaccine trial raise questions about data integrity and regulatory oversight.” I mean, shouldn't it? The fact that this was reported to the FDA and they took no further action to investigate makes all of their other efforts suspect.

NoPie 5y ago
Or it means that FDA is not doing its job properly. It could be do to lack of manpower or whatever but the fact that the FDA did not inspect the sites in question doesn't mean that the complaint wasn't justified. It just means it wasn't investigated, so no clear conclusions can be made.
- HideousKojima 5y ago
  >Or it means that FDA is not doing its job properly. So you're saying it "raise[s] questions about... regulatory oversight"?
  - NoPie 5y ago
    It definitely does. There have been many scandals with pharma and regulators. Opioid crisis is one example, even though all involved parties currently blame each other and it has not been established who shares the most guilt yet. In either case, we definitely needed alarming articles about risks from newly marketed opioids 10 years ago. The other worry is the recent approval of aducanumab by the FDA.

NoPie 5y ago

BMJ correspondents understand the industry and see some failures in one of the most important clinical trials for this pandemic. They consider this unacceptable and seeing that regulators haven't really done their job at overseeing this properly, have done some investigation and want to make other healthcare professional aware of this issue so that ultimately it can be properly resolved. The title is very precise and corresponds with the contents very closely. You could say it is a little bit alarmistic though. If it reads like Fox News to you, then you probably don't understand this industry. That's fine but don't call it wrong.

csee 5y ago

Maybe it's not about whether the article can or can't be shared, it's just that they don't want lies to be explicitly told about their article, because that negatively impacts their reputation? For example, the claim of the fact-checkers that the article contains "flaws".