Time to Assume Health Research is Fraudulent Until Proven Otherwise

[LA]

Time to assume that health research is fraudulent until proven otherwise?
July 2021
Health research is based on trust. Health professionals and journal editors reading the results of a clinical trial assume that the trial happened and that the results were honestly reported. But about 20% of the time, said Ben Mol, professor of obstetrics and gynaecology at Monash Health, they would be wrong. As I’ve been concerned about research fraud for 40 years, I wasn’t that surprised as many would be by this figure, but it led me to think that the time may have come to stop assuming that research actually happened and is honestly reported, and assume that the research is fraudulent until there is some evidence to support it having happened and been honestly reported. The Cochrane Collaboration, which purveys “trusted information,” has now taken a step in that direction.

As he described in a webinar last week, Ian Roberts, professor of epidemiology at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, began to have doubts about the honest reporting of trials after a colleague asked if he knew that his systematic review showing the mannitol halved death from head injury was based on trials that had never happened. He didn’t, but he set about investigating the trials and confirmed that they hadn’t ever happened. They all had a lead author who purported to come from an institution that didn’t exist and who killed himself a few years later. The trials were all published in prestigious neurosurgery journals and had multiple co-authors. None of the co-authors had contributed patients to the trials, and some didn’t know that they were co-authors until after the trials were published. When Roberts contacted one of the journals the editor responded that “I wouldn’t trust the data.” Why, Roberts wondered, did he publish the trial? None of the trials have been retracted.

Later Roberts, who headed one of the Cochrane groups, did a systematic review of colloids versus crystalloids only to discover again that many of the trials that were included in the review could not be trusted. He is now sceptical about all systematic reviews, particularly those that are mostly reviews of multiple small trials. He compared the original idea of systematic reviews as searching for diamonds, knowledge that was available if brought together in systematic reviews; now he thinks of systematic reviewing as searching through rubbish. He proposed that small, single centre trials should be discarded, not combined in systematic reviews.

Mol, like Roberts, has conducted systematic reviews only to realise that most of the trials included either were zombie trials that were fatally flawed or were untrustworthy. What, he asked, is the scale of the problem? Although retractions are increasing, only about 0.04% of biomedical studies have been retracted, suggesting the problem is small. But the anaesthetist John Carlisle analysed 526 trials submitted to Anaesthesia and found that 73 (14%) had false data, and 43 (8%) he categorised as zombie. When he was able to examine individual patient data in 153 studies, 67 (44%) had untrustworthy data and 40 (26%) were zombie trials. Many of the trials came from the same countries (Egypt, China, India, Iran, Japan, South Korea, and Turkey), and when John Ioannidis, a professor at Stanford University, examined individual patient data from trials submitted from those countries to Anaesthesia during a year he found that many were false: 100% (7/7) in Egypt; 75% (3/ 4) in Iran; 54% (7/13) in India; 46% (22/48) in China; 40% (2/5) in Turkey; 25% (5/20) in South Korea; and 18% (2/11) in Japan. Most of the trials were zombies. Ioannidis concluded that there are hundreds of thousands of zombie trials published from those countries alone.

Others have found similar results, and Mol’s best guess is that about 20% of trials are false. Very few of these papers are retracted.

We have long known that peer review is ineffective at detecting fraud, especially if the reviewers start, as most have until now, by assuming that the research is honestly reported. I remember being part of a panel in the 1990s investigating one of Britain’s most outrageous cases of fraud, when the statistical reviewer of the study told us that he had found multiple problems with the study and only hoped that it was better done than it was reported. We asked if had ever considered that the study might be fraudulent, and he told us that he hadn’t.

We have now reached a point where those doing systematic reviews must start by assuming that a study is fraudulent until they can have some evidence to the contrary.

[read more]

Time to assume that health research is fraudulent until proven otherwise? - The BMJ

Health research is based on trust. Health professionals and journal editors reading the results of a clinical trial assume that the trial happened and that the results were honestly reported. [...]More...

blogs.bmj.com

 

[yerrag]

If this came out 2 years ago, before the COVID Hoax and before the Election Hoax, the author would be called a conspiracy theorist.

Now they are the conspirators, and we are the formerly duped.

The clueless idiots continue to believe in COVID and in honest elections. I have made a conscious decision to disengage from such people. Let them be-they deserve the whatever comes to them. I spend more time now on productive pursuits. I won't grieve for them but for my pets I would.

 

[Missenger]

If this came out 2 years ago, before the COVID Hoax and before the Election Hoax, the author would be called a conspiracy theorist.

Now they are the conspirators, and we are the formerly duped.

The clueless idiots continue to believe in COVID and in honest elections. I have made a conscious decision to disengage from such people. Let them be-they deserve the whatever comes to them. I spend more time now on productive pursuits. I won't grieve for them but for my pets I would.

There's clueless and then there's being paid to be lying sociopaths.

 

[yerrag]

There's clueless and then there's being paid to be lying sociopaths.

Don't ask me to turn the other cheek for the lying sociopaths, Mahatma.

 

[LA]

If this came out 2 years ago, before the COVID Hoax and before the Election Hoax, the author would be called a conspiracy theorist.

More and more people are waking up. These types of articles have been released about Big Pharma for many years and yes the truth was ridiculed although many of us, like you, have been doing our own health research to stay alive and well

 

[Sefton10]

In an unrelated field, I’ve published over 25 papers in peer reviewed journals as first author. Not once have I been asked for the data the studies are based on. I shudder to think how many papers in the health/medicine sphere are simply made up. If anything, the whole research publishing field incentivises fraud. Huge publishing houses own pretty much all of the journals, the researchers sign over copyright of the papers to them when they are published, then the public have to pay to access research they’ve already “funded” through taxes. And thats the genuine ones. Lots of editorial boards are simply clubs of like minded people with agendas to preserve, good luck getting anything through peer review that might threaten their agenda.

 

[LA]

In an unrelated field, I’ve published over 25 papers in peer reviewed journals as first author. Not once have I been asked for the data the studies are based on. I shudder to think how many papers in the health/medicine sphere are simply made up. If anything, the whole research publishing field incentivises fraud. Huge publishing houses own pretty much all of the journals, the researchers sign over copyright of the papers to them when they are published, then the public have to pay to access research they’ve already “funded” through taxes. And thats the genuine ones. Lots of editorial boards are simply clubs of like minded people with agendas to preserve, good luck getting anything through peer review that might threaten their agenda.

Good for you keep it up!
Fake research gradually developed after Big-Pharma wanted to push their product$. Not many people are able to do tedious research. The result is that companies and universities are relentlessly pushing fully qualified, brilliant researchers into accepting too much work.
A handful of great researchers are forced to use ghost writers to complete their *stressful* work load. The support teams hired to help with the overflow are usually chosen for their writing skills and are not science researcher investigators or other type of detective so they often have no talent for discovering mistakes in the actual research.
In addition, top level supervisors of research teams are usually in a panic to be sure they bring the research in on time so they will get their bonu$$$ and promotions (perhaps even keep their jobs) so they implement a highly stressful 'get it out yesterday modus operandi.

We live in difficult times. Stay calm and continue to do your best. If there is an investigation the examiners will discover that you did proper research.
Stick to your principles hopefully the world will evolve to a higher state of consciousness soon! You have to live with yourself. Always go to sleep with a clear conscience.
Best wishes.

 

[S-VV]

Lol. Another way to prevent patients from getting adequate care and gatekeeping pioneering uni-center studies in favour of the billion dollar big pharma ones.

“Oh you got <X> condition son? Well better get used to mindfulness and acupuncture, cause thats all the latest NICE review recommends”

 

[LA]

Lol. Another way to prevent patients from getting adequate care and gatekeeping pioneering uni-center studies in favour of the billion dollar big pharma ones.

“Oh you got <X> condition son? Well better get used to mindfulness and acupuncture, cause thats all the latest NICE review recommends”

Absolutely true. My grandfather told me to avoid doctors if I wanted to live a longer healthier life. Mindfullness meditation is not very good for some. They seem to go nuts. A work buddy told me about his friend who was doing mindfulness meditation while he was driving up to Malibu to go surfing and that he crashed while navigating dead-mans-curve.

 

[Elderflower j58]

<iframe width="640" height="360" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" style="border: none;" src="
View: https://www.bitchute.com/embed/KcuXFzkw4Wcd/
"></iframe>


Not sure if this has already been posted, even if it has this thread is its natural home.
Some jaw dropping info.

 

[yerrag]

Absolutely true. My grandfather told me to avoid doctors if I wanted to live a longer healthier life. Mindfullness meditation is not very good for some. They seem to go nuts. A work buddy told me about his friend who was doing mindfulness meditation while he was driving up to Malibu to go surfing and that he crashed while navigating dead-mans-curve.

This meditation stuff really can go overboard.

I now chide a good friend for being holed up in his home and for getting vaccinated.

He used to tell me, after going to numerous retreats to India over the years (he's loaded), that every sickness is "all in the mind." He now meditates 4 hours a day. Yet somehow all the mind crap isn't making him see that COVID is a hoax.

Meanwhile, I don't meditate and I can see the truth better. I go out and I get exposed. I wear a mask only because I don't want the hassle of having to argue with people all the time as that may just make life too unpleasant and wastes my energy.

Rich people are like the sugar in a fly trap. Doctors sell them snake oil and they get sicker and sicker. The poor are lucky they can't be fleeced.

Poor don't meditate. They are healthier. They also don't see psychiatrists. And they don't have a large home to hole up in and they don't have a choice but to get sunlight during the day, and when it rains, they shower in water rich in hydrogen peroxide ( O3 and H2O makes O2 and HsO2).

If not for the Z think tanks telling us liberalization and privatization is such a good thing, water and air and food would not be as toxic as they are now.

 

[LA]

This meditation stuff really can go overboard. I now chide a good friend for being holed up in his home and for getting vaccinated.
He used to tell me, after going to numerous retreats to India over the years (he's loaded), that every sickness is "all in the mind." He now meditates 4 hours a day. Yet somehow all the mind crap isn't making him see that COVID is a hoax.
Meanwhile, I don't meditate and I can see the truth better. I go out and I get exposed. I wear a mask only because I don't want the hassle of having to argue with people all the time as that may just make life too unpleasant and wastes my energy.
Rich people are like the sugar in a fly trap. Doctors sell them snake oil and they get sicker and sicker. The poor are lucky they can't be fleeced.
Poor don't meditate. They are healthier. They also don't see psychiatrists. And they don't have a large home to hole up in and they don't have a choice but to get sunlight during the day, and when it rains, they shower in water rich in hydrogen peroxide ( O3 and H2O makes O2 and HsO2).
If not for the Z think tanks telling us liberalization and privatization is such a good thing, water and air and food would not be as toxic as they are now.

I am sorry about your friend. I read someplace about 'du ter te' threating to poke everyone in the rear end (he announced it more graphically) with the vax if they held out on getting it. Perhaps your friend was worried. India can have too many things people might want to avoid although until B.Gates and Monsanto stuck there noses over there India still had healthy crops

Positive thinking helps some people.
Those who had the most success with publicising that mind-set were Ernest Holmes, Emmet Fox, Catherine Ponder, Louise Hay, Dr. Joseph Murphy.
"Everyday in Everyway I am getting Better and Better" is a sentence to be repeated 20 times in the morning and 20 times in the evening and was taught by a man from France. (his name escapes me - it was before our era) it was reported that many people were cured from all kinds of sicknesses they didnt even know they had simply by reciting that phrase twice daily

Large homes tend to be cold and clammy, too difficult to heat or cool + many have cement floors. Most are empty echo chambers for showing off or investing in and then selling in a year (like Miami). Small homes with too many people in them have everyone fighting. Everyone needs space.

Z think tanks are not thinking they are programmed.

 

[yerrag]

Perhaps your friend was worried.

He is worried, but it has nothing to do with Duterte. He believes MSM. Believing in the wrong things is a product of pervasive propaganda built up over centuries.

I can understand why the US and its monkey the Philippines both need a de-programming center much like China has for its Uyghur minority - brainwashed by Saudi Wahhabist propaganda. The US may even need more de-programming given it is ground zero for Zionist programming.

 

[Jinju]

In an unrelated field, I’ve published over 25 papers in peer reviewed journals as first author. Not once have I been asked for the data the studies are based on. I shudder to think how many papers in the health/medicine sphere are simply made up. If anything, the whole research publishing field incentivises fraud. Huge publishing houses own pretty much all of the journals, the researchers sign over copyright of the papers to them when they are published, then the public have to pay to access research they’ve already “funded” through taxes. And thats the genuine ones. Lots of editorial boards are simply clubs of like minded people with agendas to preserve, good luck getting anything through peer review that might threaten their agenda.

Good to know, Sefton10!
On a related note, I read a book recently that was written by a physician (now retired) where he mentioned that all clinical trials are structured and conducted by pharmaceutical companies these days. The companies own and analyse all the data, and decide what or how much of it to publish. Apparently this was not the case say 50 years ago, when an independent body would structure and conduct the clinical trials.

 

[LA]

He is worried, but it has nothing to do with Duterte. He believes MSM. Believing in the wrong things is a product of pervasive propaganda built up over centuries.

I can understand why the US and its monkey the Philippines both need a de-programming center much like China has for its Uyghur minority - brainwashed by Saudi Wahhabist propaganda. The US may even need more de-programming given it is ground zero for Zionist programming.

the real problem is there is no FREE PRESS only manipulation. This is forum is one of the few places left where people are allowed an opinion

 

[yerrag]

the real problem is there is no FREE PRESS only manipulation. This is forum is one of the few places left where people are allowed an opinion

The bots of the establishment allow uncensored discourse to such extent that that it doesn't exceed the threshold of popularity as based on eyeballs. They treat you as a friend when you aren't powerful enough to shape the opinion of the masses.

 

[LA]

I read a book recently that was written by a physician (now retired) where he mentioned that all clinical trials are structured and conducted by pharmaceutical companies these days. The companies own and analyse all the data, and decide what or how much of it to publish. Apparently this was not the case say 50 years ago, when an independent body would structure and conduct the clinical trials.

Dr. Peat has written or mentioned this problem in many ways and many times too.