Big Pharma tricks - Updated

The Scientist blows Merck's cover-up of a fake peer reviewed publication designed as a marketing tool. Free reg required to read the article but I signed up and here's a couple of the relevant quotes.

Merck paid an undisclosed sum to Elsevier to produce several volumes of a publication that had the look of a peer-reviewed medical journal, but contained only reprinted or summarized articles--most of which presented data favorable to Merck
products--that appeared to act solely as marketing tools with no disclosure of company sponsorship. [...]

The Australasian Journal of Bone and Joint Medicine, which was published by Exerpta Medica, a division of scientific publishing juggernaut Elsevier, is not indexed in the MEDLINE database, and has no website (not even a defunct one).

The Scientist noticed, but as they point out, a doctor receiving this for free in the mail, might not have realized it was just a marketing ploy and been influenced to prescribe their drugs. To be fair, Merck offers this defense.

Elsevier acknowledges the concern that the journals in question didn't have the appropriate disclosures," the statement continued. "It is worth noting that project in question was produced 6 years ago and disclosure protocols have evolved since 2003. Elsevier's current disclosure policies meet the rigor and requirements of the current publishing environment."

One wonders what other frauds were perpetrated in the regulation free era of the early 2000s.

Update: Via Jules Siegel an update from The Scientist blog (no reg required). Elsevier acknowledges they published six fake journals but insists they are no longer engaged in the practice.

Also post edited to correct the name of the source. I incorrectly identified The Scientist as New Scientist in the original.


[More posts daily at The Detroit News]