Ethics

Havard’s School of Public Health and Medical School sponsoring their course in clinical trials for FREE.

By stevev|June 9, 2013|Education, Ethics, Medicine, Public Health, Randomized Controlled Trial, Research|

HSPH-HMS214X Fundamentals of Clinical Trials is just one of the courses offered at www.edx.org.

Ever wonder what it would be like to take a course offered at an Ivy League University? Wonder no more! Harvard is part of a consortium of the most prestigious Universities in the world that is offering MOOC‘s (Massive Open Online Courses). There are no costs involved in taking a MOOC and you get all the same information that you would in an on ground course. The only differences are that you don’t get the instructor (or even TA’s) grading your papers nor will you get college credit on a transcript from Harvard. They are however the same information used in the universities’ on ground for-credit courses that can cost thousands of dollars.

MOOC’s typically use open source materials (available at no charge for personal use) and a type of self grading system based off of discussion forums in the course (It is totally up to the professor how that is handled, so it will vary depending on the course and instructor). They are a combination of one answer to cutting high educational and making it available to everyone.

The course begins October 14, 2013, runs a total of 13 weeks and depending on your background will take between 4-6 hours of your time each week. A background in biostatistics and epidemiology equivalent to the content of PH207X Health in Numbers: Quantitative Methods in Clinical & Public Health Research.

From the course site;

“This course will provide an introduction to the scientific, statistical, and ethical aspects of clinical trials research. Topics include the design, implementation, and analysis of trials, including first-in-human studies (dose-finding, safety, proof of concept, and Phase I), Phase II, Phase III, and Phase IV studies. All aspects of the development of a study protocol will be addressed, including criteria for the selection of participants, treatments, and endpoints, randomization procedures, sample size determination, data analysis, and study interpretation. The ethical issues that arise at each phase of therapy development will be explored.”

0

Senate Investigation Reveals That Millions Were Paid for Positive Spin on Spine Fusion Product

By Frank M. Painter|October 25, 2012|Ethics, News|

Senate Investigation Reveals That Millions Were Paid
for Positive Spin on Spine Fusion Product

The Chiro.Org Blog

SOURCE: MedPage Today ~ October 25, 2012

By John Fauber

Milwaukee Journal Sentinel and MedPage Today

Highly positive studies, published in peer-reviewed medical journals, depicted Medtronic’s spine fusion product as a major breakthrough in back surgery, but those studies were drafted and edited with direct input from Medtronic employees, while the doctors listed as authors were paid millions, according to a U.S. Senate investigation.

The company’s heavy, undisclosed manipulation of information about its bone morphogenetic protein-2 product called Infuse included removing and downplaying concerns about serious complications linked to the product and overstating its benefits.

The Money Trail

Over the course of 15 years, Medtronic paid $210 million to a group of 13 doctors who co-authored the series of now-repudiated papers about the product. The payments also included two corporate entities associated with some of the doctors.

The investigation by Senate Committee on Finance was prompted in part by Journal Sentinel/MedPage Today investigations that showed how the practice of medicine has been corrupted by conflicts of interest involving doctors, drug and device companies and medical journals.

(more…)

4

Newer antimicrobial therapies proposed may lead to resistance of human innate immune response.

By stevev|February 23, 2012|Ethics, Fever Management, General Health, Health Care, Immune Function, Immune System, Medicine, Public Health, Research, Safety|

One current trend into fighting antibiotic resistant bacteria is developing a new class refered to as antimicrobial peptides (AMP’s). However a newly published study published¹ a proof of concept that bacteria will develop not only resistance to these new drugs but to our own innate immune response peptides as well.

A very nice summary of the findings was published in the latest issue of The Scientist online magazine.²

1. G. J. L. Habets, Michelle, and Michael Brockhurst. “Therapeutic
antimicrobial peptides may compromise natural immunity .” Biology Letters. N.p., n.d. Web. 23 Feb. 2012. <http://rsbl.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/early/2012/01/20/rsbl.2011.1203

2. Richards, Sabrina. “Antimicrobial Cross-Resistance Risk | The Scientist.” The Scientist. N.p., 24 Jan. 2012. Web. 23 Feb. 2012. <http://the-scientist.com/2012/01/24/antimicrobial-cross-resistance-risk/

0

British Chiropractors Under Fire from Singh Supporters

By John Wiens DC|March 1, 2010|Ethics|

Chiro org has been following this story since it’s inception.

Today The Guardian reports that one in four chiropractors in Britain are under investigation as a result of a campaign by Singh supporters.

As the British Chiropractic Association’s battle with Simon Singh continues to work its way through the legal system, chiropractors are counting the financial costs of a major backlash resulting from a libel action that has left the Lord Chief Justice “baffled”. What was originally a dispute between the BCA and one science writer over free speech has become a campaign to reform an entire industry.

The article claims that one in four chiropractors in Britain are now under investigation for allegedly making misleading claims in advertisements, according to figures from the General Chiropractic Council.

2

Update on Vertebroplasty: A Unique Evidence-based Review

By Frank M. Painter|October 27, 2009|Education, Ethics|

Update on Vertebroplasty: A Unique Evidence-based Review

The Chiro.Org Blog

SOURCE: Dynamic Chiropractic

By Deborah Pate, DC, DACBR

A few years ago, I wrote an article (May 22, 2006 issue of Dynamic Chiropractic) reviewing vertebroplasty as a treatment option for painful compression fractures due to osteoporosis. [1] I felt that as chiropractors, we should be aware of the common medical procedures that are available to treat disorders we generally manage; osteoporotic compression fractures being one such entity. (more…)

11

Science writer Simon Singh wins ruling in chiropractic libel battle

By John Wiens DC|October 15, 2009|Ethics|

In two previous articles, here and here, I talked about author Simon Singh’s battle with the British Chiropractic Association. The Guardian reported yesterday that the initial ruling has been overturned.
From The Guardian:

A science writer who is being sued for libel by the British Chiropractic Association is to fight on after a preliminary judgment against him was overturned on appeal today.

Simon Singh was sued by the BCA after he wrote an article in the Guardian criticising the association for supporting members who claim that chiropractic treatments – which involve manipulation of the spine – can treat children’s colic, sleeping and feeding problems, frequent ear infections, asthma and prolonged crying.

Singh described the treatments, for which he said there is not a lot of evidence, as “bogus” and criticised the BCA for “happily promoting” them.

In May, Mr Justice Eady in the high court ruled on the meaning of the words, saying they implied the association was being deliberately dishonest. Singh said that interpretation would make it difficult for him to defend himself at a full trial.

Singh was initially refused leave to appeal, but Eady’s interpretation was rejected by Lord Justice Laws, who said Eady had risked swinging the balance of rights too far in favour of the right to reputation and against the right to free expression. Laws described Eady’s judgment as “legally erroneous”.

Many scientists and science writers have rallied to Singh’s support, claiming that the freedom of scientific opinion is at stake.

Speaking after the judgment, Singh said this was the “best possible result”.

“Simon Singh’s battle in this libel case is not only a glaring example of how the law and its interpretation are stifling free expression, it shows how urgent the case for reform has become,” said Jo Glanville, editor of Index on Censorship.

3