by Eric L. Zielinski
(NaturalNews) The World Medical Association (WMA) Declaration of Helsinki – Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects was first adopted by the 18th WMA General Assembly in Helsinki, Finland, June 1964, and has thus been the global cornerstone of research ethics and guidelines. Article 30 states:
[Sponsor link: Death By Medicine]
Authors, editors and publishers all have ethical obligations with regard to the publication of the results of research. Authors have a duty to make publicly available the results of their research on human subjects and are accountable for the completeness and accuracy of their reports. They should adhere to accepted guidelines for ethical reporting. Negative and inconclusive as well as positive results should be published or otherwise made publicly available. Sources of funding, institutional affiliations and conflicts of interest should be declared in the publication.
Diametrically opposed to this noble ambition; however, is the reality of data reporting; a concept known as “spin.”
Spin doctors
The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) defines spin as the “specific reporting that could distort the interpretation of results and mislead readers.” Spin Doctors are, thus, the people falsifying data for reasons including financial ties to Big Pharma, to achieve higher professional status and to gain grant monies.
One of the most dramatic effects of spin is seen in a recent study published by JAMA. Researchers reported that over 40 percent of the best designed, peer-reviewed scientific papers published in the world’s top medical journals misrepresented the actual findings of the research. To confirm this and to identify the nature and frequency of distorted presentation or spin, Boutron et al. systematically evaluated 616 published reports of Random Control Trials (RCTs) and after appraising the 72 eligible studies concluded that, “In the representative sample of RCT’s published in 2006 with statistically nonsignificant primary outcomes, the reporting and interpretation of findings was frequently inconsistent with the results.” In other words, most of the published research has been intentionally falsified.