Judge Rules Disputes Over Medical Studies Should Be Resolved by Researchers and Scientists not Courts

A U.S. federal appeals court ruled that disputes over medical studies should be resolved by researchers and scientists themselves, not in the courts, which it said are ill-equipped to adjudicate issues based on highly technical data. The case involved allegations by the company ONY, which claimed that its treatment for neonatal respiratory distress, Infasurf, was unfairly disparaged by a study linked to Chiesi Farmaceutici, which makes a rival medication, Curosurf. As noted by Ed Silverman, writing an article in Forbes: "In a decision that should intrigue free speech advocates, researchers and, of course, pharmaceutical advertisers, a federal appeals court has ruled that scientific debate should be resolved among scientists." Background Silverman outlines the background of the case. We are quoting his piece directly: Two years ago, a study in the Journal of Perinatology concluded that Curasurf, a drug used to treat neonatal Respiratory Distress Syndrome and sold by Cornerstone Therapeutics and its parent, Chiesi Farmaceutici, significantly reduced the likelihood of death when compared with Infasurf, which is sold by ONY (here is the study). However, ONY charged the study was methodologically unsound because the authors failed to include all of the pertinent data. For instance, ONY claimed the study reported a lower mortality for infants treated with Curosurf, but omitted data indicating these babies also had shorter hospital stays, which ONY maintained is a cr...
Source: Policy and Medicine - Category: Health Medicine and Bioethics Commentators Authors: Source Type: blogs