> Geoff,
>
> This to me is very unlikely. Pharmaceutical trials are extremely transparent, and undergo extremely detailed scrutiny be the regulatory authorities. Apart from our own individual ethical checks and balances, there would be no long-term financial incentive for Lilly either. Hearsay or fantasy like this makes good press though.
>
> Cheers, Craig
>
> Craig Currie Ph.D.
> Manager- GI & Metabolic Diseases
> Global Health Outcomes
> GlaxoWellcome R&D
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Geoff Schrecker [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 1999 6:59 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Prozac akathisia and related thoughts.
>
> I have just read a thoroughly alarming article in that well known
> journal of evidence based medicine, The Guardian. This suggested that
> Eli Lilly have known for a long time that Prozac causes akithisia, and
> IS associated with increased mortality from suicide, as well possibly
> as being associated with murder.
>
> This in itself is not too surprising, much has been written on both
> sides about prozac. However what did alarm me was the suggestion of
> extreme selection in the trial data submitted to the licensing
> authorities and the exclusions of large numbers of patients from
> meta-analyses. Exclusions of which the authorities were said to be
> unaware.
>
> Would it not be sensible for the authorities only to accept as
> evidence for licensing purposes studies which had been registered with
> the authority before starting? In this way the authority would be
> aware of any trials mysteriously disappearing when it came to
> application for license day.
>
> -----------------------
>
> Geoff Schrecker
> Gleadless Medical Centre
> Sheffield S14 1PQ
>
> http://www.glead.demon.co.uk
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|