Researchers Back Pedal From Their Own Risperdal Study

In the wake of the $2.2 billion settlement by Johnson & Johnson to resolve criminal and civil charges for illegal marketing of the Risperdal antipsychotic pill (more here), two of the authors of a medical paper that was used to inappropriately market the medicine are back peddling from the publication, according to The Chronicle of Higher Education. Denis Daneman, a professor and chair of pediatrics at the University of Toronto, asked The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, which published the article a decade ago, to retract the article or remove his name. But the publisher declined to do so, maintaining that the article was peer-reviewed and there was no evidence of any misrepresentation, the paper writes. Meanwhile, Robert Findling, a professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences at the Johns Hopkins University, says the settlement has prompted him to reconsider the article. “In light of recent events,” Findling told the paper, “I am concerned about the questions raised and, if there are errors, am committed to determining what they may be and to correcting them.” But he adds, “at this time, I do not have sufficient scientific evidence that would lead me to ask for a retraction.” The publisher, John Shelton, did not respond to the Chronicle and, Alan Greenberg, the editor in chief and a professor and chair of psychiatry at the Pennsylvania State University medical school, also did not respond to requests for comment. Here is the significance: Risperdal was no...
Source: Pharmalot - Category: Pharma Commentators Authors: Source Type: blogs