Evidence for JHarman16 | ADHD Information

Share
[QUOTE=reality]

 


    ????    This study wasn't "ghostwritten". It's not a paper written by
someone else and then "signed" by a well known doctor.


    It's a couple of unknown researchers studying hospital death data. [/
P][/QUOTE]

To address your specific point: The article you posted says nothing about
"well-known" doctors signing papers - just that they're written by one
group and signed by another.

But that fails to address the larger point: The article you posted does not
say "ghostwritten articles in JAMA & the like cannot be trusted" - it says
that JAMA & the like cannot be trusted because they publish ghostwritten
articles. In other words, these journals cannot be considered reputable
and trustworthy sources because, according to your article, up to 50% of
articles are ghostwritten, and I suppose the extrapolation from that is
that one has no way of knowing what is real hard science & what is not.

Of course, I imagine your way of knowing is that if it's a piece that reflects
positively on medications it must be ghostwritten or checkbook-ed, and if
it reflects negatively it must be hard science - after all, only the evil
pharmaceutical companies would twist science & fact into something
barely recognisable as such; the anti-med crowd would *never* do that,
right?

But I digress...the point is, JAMA can be either a reputable source that
lends credibility to the data you cite, or it can be an untrustworthy source
that allows suspect "science" to slip through. It can't be both, based on
whether the data therein supports or refutes your position.

I read that report.  Yup - all meds combined. 

But of course to mention that would take away the fear.  Most prescription deaths are anaphylactic shock from allergy, interacting with other meds, improper dosing, and abuse.  But again - to bring that out takes all the fear of our meds away.

 

 

 Meggie,

   Drug companies have people write articles on various drugs and they review them. If it's good enough for the drug company, they pay a doctor up to ,000 to sign as the author.

   Some doctors have gotten so used to the drug money that they no longer bother to read what they are signing as the "author".

   3 of the big boys at the FDA... Drs. Katz, Temple and Laughren make about an extra ,000 per day doing this.  (They had to admit their involvement with drug companies at the FDA hearing on antidepressants.)

   But, I'll get you some better proof.

Reality,

I am begging you. Go away!  You have said the same thing over and over and over and it is totally crap! 

EVERYBODY WHO IS NEW ON THIS SITE:

REALITY, ADHDisBOGUS, CURUS, AND BALANCED ARE TROLLS.  THEY ARE ROBOTS TRAINED AND BRAINWASHED TO ATTACK FOLKS WITH ADHD AND TO LIE TO US ABOUT THE DANGERS OF MEDICATION!

 

 Fallen,

   That Dutch study was on just 3 types of meds.

   And I thought mine was on just prescription drugs, but it looks like ALL drugs.

[QUOTE=reality]

 

 Fallen,

   That Dutch study was on just 3 types of meds.

   And I thought mine was on just prescription drugs, but it looks like ALL drugs.

[/QUOTE]

No. Read the article properly and you'll see that it's referring to all deaths from prescription drugs.

Times report
Fallen38674.8566666667This is the only story on it.

 Sure it is a true story, but it is an estimate.

 From 1966-1996.

 Many advances have been made, even since 1996.

 We also recognize other interactions that we didn't back then.

 Vioxx , celebrex, etc.

 But again,

 WHAT DOES THIS HAVE TO DO WITH ADHD?

 This is ALL MEDS, not just one or two. 

 My biggest problem with this study?

 There is no margin of error given.  Every research and every study HAS a margin for error. We may have attributed a death to a med and it be arsenic, 3.1 or something, and we didn't know to test for it. WE never knew to test blood for aids, now it is standard. AS advances are made, things get broken down further.

 You all deny adhd exists.

 This is not about meds, so stop the lie. You deny adhd.  Clearly stated when you ask, well there are no tests.. bs.
 

 

 JHarman,

   The data from the study was considered to be good enough to be published in the Journal of American Medical Association.

   Adverse reactions to prescription and even otc drugs do kill people.... tens of thousands of them.... every year.

   If you figure in just how many prescription drugs are taken every day in the USA, this "death" figure isn't very large at all. But when I point it out as 1 American every 5 minutes, it hits closer to home.

   Even if I get you some "newer" info, it really won't change the figures much. Every year, there's more new drugs put out there and more people taking them.

bugz,

   I've never denied that ADHD exists.

   I think the tests you refer to are for "chemical imbalance".  THERE ARE NO SAFE TESTS TO CHECK THE "PROPER BALANCED LEVEL" OF EITHER SEROTONIN OR DOPAMINE.

Really, Would you like me to dig out some posts from you about anti adhd?


 Stop your crap and disappear.

 BEGONE. SHOO FLY.

 funny, you can't defend your issue to ME.

bugz,

    Please show me some posts I made in which I claimed ADHD does not exist.

 

mercury.. ring a bell. adhd sarcastically referred to as really autism..

 I do my homework before and after. Thats why I catch liars.


 how is your dead son??


 

Boost the Florea which helps prevent illness which is destoryed by antibiotics.

 

You must admit Reality.  That was kind of funny!!

[QUOTE=reality]

   The data from the study was considered to be good enough to be
published in the Journal of American Medical Association.


[/QUOTE]

So JAMA is a reputable source all of a sudden?

From the article posted in your "Training Doctors" thread:
"Doctors rely on peer-reviewed medical journals to learn about
prescription drugs. These journals include the Lancet, British Medical
Journal, New England Journal of Medicine and the Journal of the
American
Medical Association. It is assumed that these professional journals
offer
the hard science behind any given drug. This assumption is wrong.
Medical journals can't be trusted thanks to medical ghost writing."

So...what? JAMA can only be trusted if it's presenting data criticizing
medications, but if it presents data supporting their use, it can't?

How do you explain your contradictory logic here?

[Edited to make nouns & pronouns agree...]meggie38673.3853356481 [QUOTE=Guests]

 


 Meggie,


    Just for you...


    I won't use JAMA anymore even though some of their stuff isn't
tainted by drug money.

[/QUOTE]

*sigh*

I never said you shouldn't cite JAMA. I said you shouldn't say things like
"JAMA thought the data was solid enough to publish" as an appeal to
authority, when you've previously posted articles that say JAMA can't be
trusted as an authority because of X, Y, and Z. It's one or the other, not
both, depending on whether or not it's supporting your position.

But I'm finished beating my head against this particular wall.

 

   There are new people coming here every day. So, my "job" isn't done.... it's neverending.

reality,

If you believe medications are evil incarnate waiting to jump out and kill you, just don't take them, don't give them to your children. Its that easy.

Let the rest of us be responsible for ourselves and our children.

I think you have been here long enough to realize you are not convincing anyone. I will admit that you probably have made some people a little more cautious about just letting the dr put their kids on meds when interventions or supplements may be the best answer for them. I'll give you that. It may have even saved a lot of grief.

Your "job" here is done. We are all now aware that meds can be dangerous and sometimes lethal. You can stop now.

Reality,

I am begging you. Go away!  You have said the same thing over and over and over and it is totally crap! 

EVERYBODY WHO IS NEW ON THIS SITE:

REALITY, ADHDisBOGUS, CURUS, AND BALANCED ARE TROLLS.  THEY ARE ROBOTS TRAINED AND BRAINWASHED TO ATTACK FOLKS WITH ADHD AND TO LIE TO US ABOUT THE DANGERS OF MEDICATION!

[QUOTE=reality]

 


 Meggie,


   Drug companies have people write articles on various drugs and they
review them. If it's good enough for the drug company, they pay a doctor
up to ,000 to sign as the author.


   Some doctors have gotten so used to the drug money that they no
longer bother to read what they are signing as the "author".


   3 of the big boys at the FDA... Drs. Katz, Temple and Laughren make
about an extra ,000 per day doing this.  (They had to admit their
involvement with drug companies at the FDA hearing on antidepressants.)


   But, I'll get you some better proof.

[/QUOTE]

reality,

I'm a professional writer and copy editor and have been for the better part
of a decade.

I understand what ghostwriting is, and I also know it is a practice used by
pharmaceutical companies to get studies published. I further know that
many of the "big" medical journals are requiring full disclosure because
they've been caught out at this & it's quite an embarrassment for them.

I don't need proof of this. It's not news to me.

And none of it addresses the point I was making in the first place, which I
don't think was terribly difficult to grasp. If you're going to ignore the
point I'm making, focusing on details that have nothing to do with it
rather than trying to explain how you can logically reconcile JAMA being
both a reputable source of information AND a source that can't be trusted
(depending on whether or not it's supporting your position), there's no
point in discussing it with you.

Either you're being purposefully obtuse, or you're truly just not getting it,
but in either case, never mind.

 

 Meggie,

    Just for you...

    I won't use JAMA anymore even though some of their stuff isn't tainted by drug money.

He never will admit that he is a hypocrite or that the information was exaggerated.  He is all about scare tactics, he will always be about scare tactics, and he will always be able to distort the truth in order to use scare tactics.  I feel sorry for anybody who is new here that believes all the negatives he says, with out trying to learn for themselves

 

 

http://www.cnn.com/HEALTH/9804/14/drug.reaction/