It seems that they paid the guy to develop this study and had it published as an "independent" study without disclosing his potential conflicts of interest. It seems like a case of moving the goalposts exactly where you want them to be.
To help make their point, Elan and Wyeth have cited the Archives of Neurology paper, titled "A Neuropsychological Test Battery for Use in Alzheimer Disease Clinical Trials," as independent, scientific proof that validates the NTB.
Harrison is the lead author of that NTB paper, but his role as a consultant paid by Elan and Wyeth to create the test is not disclosed in it. Harrison is the only author of six listed in the paper's conflict-of-interest statement as having no financial conflicts with Elan and Wyeth. Harrison's five co-authors are all employed by Elan or Wyeth.
1 comment:
Joe, as you point out, only one author apparently did not have all his affiliations properly footnoted. The others all did have their affiliations with Elan and Wyeth detailed - so no one would read this paper and believe that it was done by an independent 3rd party.
In other words, there were no shady dealings and this whole idea (which originated with TheStreetDotCom) has no merit.
BTW, NTB is used by other companies, most recently by PRANA.
Post a Comment