Comments on: Medical Ghostwriting Unethically Pushed Hormone Replacement Therapy https://gregladen.com/blog/2009/08/21/medical-ghostwriting-unethical/ Thu, 07 Dec 2017 01:07:40 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.4.8 By: Bob https://gregladen.com/blog/2009/08/21/medical-ghostwriting-unethical/#comment-542761 Thu, 27 Aug 2009 09:19:39 +0000 http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2009/08/21/medical-ghostwriting-unethical/#comment-542761 Where is the peer review process in all of this? The data in a results section of a scientific article is just a set of numbers. It’s the job of the reviewers to decide whether or not the data support the claims and statements made in the discussion and conclusions sections of the article. To my knowledge none of the recent newspaper articles on ghost writing have claimed that the data in these papers is fraudulent. If the data is true then it is the job of the peer reviewers to guard against biased and unsupported conclusions. Even if the article makes it into publication with questionable conclusions it is also the job of the medical professional to read it critically and decide for themselves if the data support the conclusions. If they don’t feel qualified to make that determination then maybe they should find a different field in which to practice…I wouldn’t want them treating me.

I would rather have reliable data from a ghostwriter than falsified data from the lead author (google Dr. Kuklo).

]]>