Merck and research ethics ... and community impact

Dear Colleagues

A recent article in the New York Tines talks about something that many of us have suspected for years:

April 16, 2008
Merck Wrote Drug Studies for Doctors
By STEPHANIE SAUL
The drug maker Merck drafted dozens of research studies for a best-selling drug, then lined up prestigious doctors to put their names on the reports before publication, according to an article to be published Wednesday in a leading medical journal.

The problem with this is that research and (peer reviewed) publication are at the center of the health industry's modus operandi and how critical information is shared both within the research community and to the wider public.

I worked for a consulting unit of a well known accounting firm some years ago (more than 10) and was appalled to find out how many "studies" the firm had made about health and the impact of tobacco products. The correlation between the research and the results was dwarfed by the correlation between the fees from the tobacco companies and the results. Other work seemed to be more about the fee flow than the value of the work to society. I was appalled ... people knew it ... and I did not last too long as a member of the staff.

The importance of profit and financial returns has taken over modern society ... and we are all now at risk. The house of cards is tumbling down ... which is a pity. In the past fifty years science has progressed in an impressive manner, but it has been very badly used to improve the global society ... me and my wealth has become much more important that we and society's wealth.

Tr-Ac-Net wants to see community impact as the driver of decision making ... especially as it relates to the allocation of resources for development. With this approach to performance metrics it will be possible to get young energy and innovation to work on important issues and not have to take a vow of poverty to put their time into these important things.

And then it would be great to see Merck paying its researchers based on the amount of community good their work makes possible.

Sincerely

Peter Burgess