Re: The Politics of Vitamin Research

--

"Herman Rubin" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Rich Shewmaker said:

--

Quoted message said:

"N-H-P" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Is Medical Scientism a bunch of crock when it comes to Vitamin
Research, or what? Do scientists intentionally distort their findings

Quoted message said:

Scientific method is defined by its design to prevent such distortion.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

by any and all means possible in order to further their political
agenda?

Scientists do not, but the ones who dole out the money for
scientific research do. With the great bulk of the research
money coming from the federal government, not much vitamin
research will be done unless the NIH thinks it worthwhile.

For patentable medicines, private industry can take a chance,
since the rewards are high. The supplement industry may look
large to some, but it is small potatoes, and there is no way
to corner part of it; just about everything is generic.
--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
[email hidden] Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558

So then, it is the political agenda of the federal government (supplying the
great bulk of the research money) to suppress research favoring vitamin
supplements in favor of promoting the sale of statin drugs? Why? Besides, it
is not Mr. Gohde's contention that vitamin researchers do not get funded,
but that they cheat when reporting their results.

You surely know more than a few scientists at Purdue. Ask them if they are
willing to cook their data or adjust their conclusions to meet a common
political agenda.

--Rich

"Rich Shewmaker" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

Besides, it
is not Mr. Gohde's contention that vitamin researchers ...
cheat when reporting their results.

I never made any such claim.

At best, I claimed that the 'negative conclusions' of 'some' vitamin
research appears to be politically motivated. I did state that 'some'
research appear to be 'down-right fraudulent,' but I was intending to
refer *only* to a couple of recent review studies that erroneously
'appeared' to make the conclusion that the use of antioxidant
supplements were not effective. The use of vitamin supplements are a
lot more effective than the medical establishment (i.e., these recent
antioxidant reviews) would like you to believe.

Of course, what they precisely did was engage in intentionally
deceptive word games

Quoted message said:

You surely know more than a few scientists at Purdue. Ask them if they are
willing to cook their data or adjust their conclusions to meet a common
political agenda.

I never made any such claim.

I never claimed anbody was cooking their data!

I never claimed that *all* scientists have a common political agenda.

See my comments above.
--
John Gohde,
Achieving good Health is an Art, NOT a Science!

Health-with-Attitude is a support group for people
trying to follow a Healthy Lifestyle.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Health-with-Attitude/

--

"N-H-P" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Rich Shewmaker" <[email hidden]> wrote

< snip > The use of vitamin

supplements are a

Quoted message said:

lot more effective than the medical establishment (i.e., these recent
antioxidant reviews) would like you to believe.

I'm not at all clear why the medical establishment would want to deceive me
about this. Surely vitamins do not compete directly with statins or other
prescription drugs at the consumer level. And even if my doctor prescribes
statins for me, I doubt he would object to my taking vitamins as well. In
fact, he does recommend folate supplement and a daily aspirin, neither of
which are high profit items for the "Medical Establishment." Do you really
think that research scientists see supplementary vitamins as a threat to
replace prescription medication and thereby a threat to their livelihoods?
Precisely what do you think the "Medical Establishment" is doing, and WHY?

--Rich

Rich Shewmaker said:

--

"Herman Rubin" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Rich Shewmaker said:

--

Quoted message said:

"N-H-P" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

>Is Medical Scientism a bunch of crock when it comes to Vitamin
>Research, or what? Do scientists intentionally distort their findings

Quoted message said:

Scientific method is defined by its design to prevent such distortion.

Quoted message said:

>by any and all means possible in order to further their political
>agenda?

Scientists do not, but the ones who dole out the money for
scientific research do. With the great bulk of the research
money coming from the federal government, not much vitamin
research will be done unless the NIH thinks it worthwhile.

For patentable medicines, private industry can take a chance,
since the rewards are high. The supplement industry may look
large to some, but it is small potatoes, and there is no way
to corner part of it; just about everything is generic.
--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
[email hidden] Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558

So then, it is the political agenda of the federal government (supplying the
great bulk of the research money) to suppress research favoring vitamin
supplements in favor of promoting the sale of statin drugs? Why? Besides, it
is not Mr. Gohde's contention that vitamin researchers do not get funded,
but that they cheat when reporting their results.

You surely know more than a few scientists at Purdue. Ask them if they are
willing to cook their data or adjust their conclusions to meet a common
political agenda.

--Rich

Depends on who's funding the research - paying the bills.

'Ghostwritten' research claims
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/low/health/1806613.stm

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=research+studies+ghostwritten+by+drug+companies&btnG=Google+Search

--

Pramesh

Rich Shewmaker <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

--

"Herman Rubin" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Rich Shewmaker said:

--

Quoted message said:

"N-H-P" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
> Is Medical Scientism a bunch of crock when it comes to Vitamin
> Research, or what? Do scientists intentionally distort their

findings

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Scientific method is defined by its design to prevent such distortion.

Quoted message said:

> by any and all means possible in order to further their political
> agenda?

Scientists do not, but the ones who dole out the money for
scientific research do. With the great bulk of the research
money coming from the federal government, not much vitamin
research will be done unless the NIH thinks it worthwhile.

For patentable medicines, private industry can take a chance,
since the rewards are high. The supplement industry may look
large to some, but it is small potatoes, and there is no way
to corner part of it; just about everything is generic.
--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
[email hidden] Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558

So then, it is the political agenda of the federal government (supplying

the

Quoted message said:

great bulk of the research money) to suppress research favoring vitamin
supplements in favor of promoting the sale of statin drugs? Why? Besides,

it

Quoted message said:

is not Mr. Gohde's contention that vitamin researchers do not get funded,
but that they cheat when reporting their results.

You surely know more than a few scientists at Purdue. Ask them if they are
willing to cook their data or adjust their conclusions to meet a common
political agenda.

--Rich

Herman does not recognize that when something cannot be put on
prescription and/or patented, then no one is interested in researching it.
The power of the prescription is what gives physcians their terrific power,
not knowledge. The medical-industrial complex does not really care about
research on something that cannot be controlled. Statins, by the way,
result in about a 23% chance of a cancer diagnosis in year 1 of use for
those over 65. That finding is ignored because they say it is not 'causal,'
but then there is no knowledge of why that happens.

<[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

Herman teaches statistics but hates data.

Ha, ... Hah, Ha!

That was a good one!

On Wed, 20 Aug 2003 12:08:19 GMT, <[email hidden]>
posted:

Quoted message said:

Herman does not recognize that when something cannot be put on
prescription and/or patented, then no one is interested in researching it.

Not from what I've seen, working in labs for many years.

Quoted message said:

The power of the prescription is what gives physcians their terrific power,
not knowledge.

Yes they are a gatekeeper to the excesses of patient self-regulation.
In my experience here, they are generally loathe to write
prescriptions unless they are essenmtial.

Quoted message said:

The medical-industrial complex does not really care about
research on something that cannot be controlled.

But the scientific community does. Don't confuse the two.

Quoted message said:

Statins, by the way,
result in about a 23% chance of a cancer diagnosis in year 1 of use for
those over 65.

And the rate in those NOT taking statins? Where is your evidence?

Quoted message said:

That finding is ignored because they say it is not 'causal,'

So it doesn't matter? I thought you were claiming that it WAS causal.
You do know what causal means I hope.

Quoted message said:

but then there is no knowledge of why that happens.

Well please demonstrate that it does first. And that this does not
happen in equivalent folks NOT taking statins.