Editing Pharma

From TobaccoControl Tactics
Jump to: navigation, search

Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.

The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.

Latest revision Your text
Line 23: Line 23:
 
In fact in most cases, the success rate was higher if '''no''' NRT was used.
 
In fact in most cases, the success rate was higher if '''no''' NRT was used.
  
Additionally, a study by Reuven Dar and Jean-Jacques Etter showed that commonly used placebo tests that test the effect of NRT products, carried out by the pharmaceutical nicotine producers, are defective and overestimate the effect of those products. <ref>[http://whyquit.com/studies/2005_Dar_NRT_Placebo_Effect.pdf Assigned Versus Perceived Placebo Effects in Nicotine Replacement Therapy for Smoking Reduction in Swiss Smokers]</ref>
+
 
+
Gregory N. Connolly, professor of the Practice of Public Health, Director, Center for Global Tobacco Control recently published a study <ref>[http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/early/2012/01/10/tobaccocontrol-2011-050129.abstract A prospective cohort study challenging the effectiveness of population-based medical intervention for smoking cessation]</ref> that he co-authored that came to the following conclusion  
Gregory N. Connolly, professor of the Practice of Public Health, Director, Center for Global Tobacco Control recently published a study <ref>[http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/early/2012/01/10/tobaccocontrol-2011-050129.abstract A prospective cohort study challenging the effectiveness of population-based medical intervention for smoking cessation]</ref> that he co-authored that came to the following conclusion:
 
  
 
<blockquote>This study finds that persons who have quit smoking relapsed at equivalent rates, whether or not they used NRT to help them in their quit attempts. Cessation medication policy should be made in the larger context of public health, and increasing individual treatment coverage should not be at the expense of population evidence-based programmes and policies.</blockquote>  
 
<blockquote>This study finds that persons who have quit smoking relapsed at equivalent rates, whether or not they used NRT to help them in their quit attempts. Cessation medication policy should be made in the larger context of public health, and increasing individual treatment coverage should not be at the expense of population evidence-based programmes and policies.</blockquote>  
  
Please note that letters disagreeing with this study were all submitted by researchers who had ties to the pharmaceutical industry.<ref>[http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/early/2012/01/10/tobaccocontrol-2011-050129.abstract/reply#tobaccocontrol_el_3882 Replies to A prospective cohort study challenging the effectiveness of population-based medical intervention for smoking cessation ]</ref> What is intriguing about this study is that it was completed in 2006 yet it was only published in January 2012.  Could Professor Connolly's resignation <ref>[http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704405704576064000800551720.html FDA Tobacco Adviser Resigns ]</ref> from the FDA tobacco-advisory committee have anything to do with it? Could his support <ref>[http://axcessnews.com/index.php/articles/show/id/21667 Harvard Prof's Interview Lends Impetus to 22nd Century Group's Very Low Nicotine Tobacco ]</ref>  of a pharmaceutical smoked cigarette (that would most probably compete with nicotine replacement treatment) have anything to do with the delayed publication of this study?  Whatever the reasons, it is quite strange that in the ''publish or perish'' world of epidemiology,<ref>[http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?storycode=411323 'Publish or perish' culture distorting research results]</ref> research would be published after a 6-year delay  
+
Please note that letters disagreeing with this study were all submitted by researchers who had ties to the pharmaceutical industry.<ref>[http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/early/2012/01/10/tobaccocontrol-2011-050129.abstract/reply#tobaccocontrol_el_3882 Replies to A prospective cohort study challenging the effectiveness of population-based medical intervention for smoking cessation ]</ref> What is intriguing about this study is that it was completed in 2006 yet it was only published in January 2012.  Could Professor Connolly's resignation <ref>[http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704405704576064000800551720.html FDA Tobacco Adviser Resigns ]</ref> from the FDA tobacco-advisory committee have anything to do with it? Could his support <ref>[http://axcessnews.com/index.php/articles/show/id/21667 Harvard Prof's Interview Lends Impetus to 22nd Century Group's Very Low Nicotine Tobacco ]</ref>  of a pharmaceutical smoked cigarette (that would most probably compete with nicotine replacement treatment) have anything to do with the delayed publication of this study?  Whatever the reasons, it is quite strange that in the ''publish or perish'' world of epidemiology,<ref>[http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?storycode=411323 'Publish or perish' culture distorting research results]</ref> research would be published with a 6-year delay  
  
 
But when even the father of the universally known and utilized ''nicotine dependence test'', Karl Fagerström,  has a change of heart  and now concedes that nicotine is not the only reason people smoke, is it any wonder nicotine replacement therapy is virtually useless? <ref>[http://www.formindep.org/Fagerstrom-Finds-His-Way-To.html Fagerström Finds His Way To Damascus]</ref>
 
But when even the father of the universally known and utilized ''nicotine dependence test'', Karl Fagerström,  has a change of heart  and now concedes that nicotine is not the only reason people smoke, is it any wonder nicotine replacement therapy is virtually useless? <ref>[http://www.formindep.org/Fagerstrom-Finds-His-Way-To.html Fagerström Finds His Way To Damascus]</ref>
Line 44: Line 43:
 
the move to NRT as the only way to combat this addiction is seen as normative. Unassisted smoking cessation is seen as ineffective since smokers’ confidence in their ability to succeed is undermined by their belief that they are addicted.<ref>[http://www.democracyinstitute.org/LiteratureRetrieve.aspx?ID=108974&A=SearchResult&SearchID=4783725&ObjectID=108974&ObjectType=6 PRESCRIPTION FOR CONFLICT: WHY THE ALLIANCE BETWEEN THE PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY AND THE ANTI-TOBACCO MOVEMENT IS NOT IN THE BEST INTERESTS OF SMOKERS]</ref></blockquote>
 
the move to NRT as the only way to combat this addiction is seen as normative. Unassisted smoking cessation is seen as ineffective since smokers’ confidence in their ability to succeed is undermined by their belief that they are addicted.<ref>[http://www.democracyinstitute.org/LiteratureRetrieve.aspx?ID=108974&A=SearchResult&SearchID=4783725&ObjectID=108974&ObjectType=6 PRESCRIPTION FOR CONFLICT: WHY THE ALLIANCE BETWEEN THE PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY AND THE ANTI-TOBACCO MOVEMENT IS NOT IN THE BEST INTERESTS OF SMOKERS]</ref></blockquote>
  
Israeli studies conducted by Dr. Reuven Dar conclude that nicotine is not addictive as physiological addictions are usually defined. Nicotine does have a physiological role in increasing cognitive abilities but it's not an addictive substance -- like heroin for example -- which creates biological withdrawal symptoms.  Dr. Dar believes that understanding smoking as a habit, as opposed to an addiction, will put the emphasis on psychological and behavioral aspects when helping smokers quit. This is less than likely to happen, because with the billions of profits Big Pharma risks to lose if the nicotine addiction theory is  disproved by an ever increasing number of researchers, it will persistently defend it anyway: they will always find scientists and tobacco control advocates all too eager to perpetuate a fallacy for money.  ''These findings might not be popular with advocates of the nicotine addiction theory, because they undermine the physiological role of nicotine and emphasize mind over matter when it comes to smoking '' Dr. Dar sharply opines. <ref>[http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/07/100713144920.htm Smoking Mind Over Smoking Matter: Surprising New Study Shows Cigarette Cravings Result from Habit, Not Addiction]</ref>
+
Israeli studies conducted by Dr. Reuven Dar conclude that nicotine is not addictive as physiological addictions are usually defined. Nicotine does have a physiological role in increasing cognitive abilities but it's not an addictive substance like heroin for example, which creates biological withdrawal symptoms.  Dr. Dar believes that understanding smoking as a habit, as opposed to an addiction, will put the emphasis on psychological and behavioral aspects when helping smokers quit. This is less than likely to happen, because with the billions of profits Big Pharma risks to lose if the nicotine addiction theory is  disproved by an ever increasing number of researchers, it will persistently continue to defend it anyway as they will always find scientists and tobacco control advocates all too eager to perpetuate a fallacy for money.  ''These findings might not be popular with advocates of the nicotine addiction theory, because they undermine the physiological role of nicotine and emphasize mind over matter when it comes to smoking '' Dr. Dar astutely opines. <ref>[http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/07/100713144920.htm Smoking Mind Over Smoking Matter: Surprising New Study Shows Cigarette Cravings Result from Habit, Not Addiction]</ref>
  
 
Funding Tobacco Control organizations, astroturf groups and bans is not all the pharmaceutical industry does to boost its profits. It also practices a devious way to advertise cessation drugs (without even naming them) in the form of infomercials that mislead the viewer into thinking that they are public service  messages.  A typical example can be found here: [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j8orUjJXkKo New Advertising Trend: Fake "Public Service" Ads ] .  The following quit ''campaign'' [http://quit-smoking-canada.ca/en/home/ Quit Smoking Canada ] carries a tiny mention at the bottom ''This campaign is brought to you by one of canada’s leading research-based pharmaceutical companies '' without which the reader would have never known that it was Big Pharma funded.  
 
Funding Tobacco Control organizations, astroturf groups and bans is not all the pharmaceutical industry does to boost its profits. It also practices a devious way to advertise cessation drugs (without even naming them) in the form of infomercials that mislead the viewer into thinking that they are public service  messages.  A typical example can be found here: [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j8orUjJXkKo New Advertising Trend: Fake "Public Service" Ads ] .  The following quit ''campaign'' [http://quit-smoking-canada.ca/en/home/ Quit Smoking Canada ] carries a tiny mention at the bottom ''This campaign is brought to you by one of canada’s leading research-based pharmaceutical companies '' without which the reader would have never known that it was Big Pharma funded.  
Line 55: Line 54:
 
==Company Listing==
 
==Company Listing==
 
===Johnson &amp; Johnson===  
 
===Johnson &amp; Johnson===  
:Under the banner of its subsidiary, McNeil Consumer Products, J&amp;J markets the Nicotrol nicotine patch and nicotine inhaler. The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation is a big shareholder in J&amp;J and began its massive funding of tobacco control in the U.S. in 1991, the same year the FDA approved the nicotine patch as a prescription drug. Pharmacia reacquired the rights to market the Nicotrol Inhaler in North America from J&amp;J's McNeil in July 2000.
+
:Under the banner of its subsidiary, McNeil Consumer Products, J&amp;J markets the Nicotrol nicotine patch and nicotine inhaler. The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation is the biggest single shareholder in J&amp;J and began its massive funding of tobacco control in the U.S. in 1991, the same year the FDA approved the nicotine patch as a prescription drug. Pharmacia reacquired the rights to market the Nicotrol Inhaler in North America from J&amp;J's McNeil in July 2000.
 
 
 
===GlaxoSmithKline===  
 
===GlaxoSmithKline===  
 
:Pharmaceutical giants Glaxo Wellcome and SmithKline Beecham merged on December 27, 2000, making the new company the world's biggest drugs group by sales. Glaxo Wellcome markets Zyban (buproprion) and SKB markets Nicoderm CQ nicotine patch and Nicorette gum. One of the major holdups in getting FTC approval for the merger was that both companies sold smoking cessation products, but even though these cessation products accounted for less than 4% of SK's sales, neither company was willing for them to be sold to another pharmaceutical company to facilitate the merger. SK was also investigated by a congressional committee for overpricing of cancer treatments. SK infuriated the committee by refusing to hand over information about Kytril, its anti-nausea drug for chemotheraphy patients. ("Federal smoke delays merger," Andrew Clark, ''The Guardian'', October 10, 2000).
 
:Pharmaceutical giants Glaxo Wellcome and SmithKline Beecham merged on December 27, 2000, making the new company the world's biggest drugs group by sales. Glaxo Wellcome markets Zyban (buproprion) and SKB markets Nicoderm CQ nicotine patch and Nicorette gum. One of the major holdups in getting FTC approval for the merger was that both companies sold smoking cessation products, but even though these cessation products accounted for less than 4% of SK's sales, neither company was willing for them to be sold to another pharmaceutical company to facilitate the merger. SK was also investigated by a congressional committee for overpricing of cancer treatments. SK infuriated the committee by refusing to hand over information about Kytril, its anti-nausea drug for chemotheraphy patients. ("Federal smoke delays merger," Andrew Clark, ''The Guardian'', October 10, 2000).

Please note that all contributions to TobaccoControl Tactics may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see TobaccoControl Tactics:Copyrights for details). Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!

Cancel Editing help (opens in new window)