The case reported in the Mother Jones article happened at my alma mater, a state university with many biomedical research studies going on at any given time. The article author later published a follow-up piece
examines some of the trade-offs involved in the still flawed, but still necessary, process of conducting clinical trials of proposed new treatments. Human beings who propose new treatments often have a bias to suppose that the new treaments are more safe and more effective than previous treatments--especially if they have a financial interest in the new treatment. People who have a financial interest in other treatments, or in not seeking effective treatment at all (e.g., faith healers) may have a bias that runs in the other direction. The way to check the safety and effectiveness of a treatment is to run an honest clinical trial with adequate justification from known science and sufficient statistical power. But keeping the trial honest involves human beings disciplining themselves not to jump to conclusions. As Richard Feynman said to graduates of Caltech: "The first principle is that you must not fool yourself--and you are the easiest person to fool."
The case reported in the Mother Jones article happened at my alma mater, a state university with many biomedical research studies going on at any given time. The article author later published a follow-up piece
http://www.thehastingscenter.org/Bioethicsforum/Post.aspx?id...
in another publication. Two articles by different authors in local publications last year
http://blogs.citypages.com/blotter/2012/11/dan_markingsons_s...
and just last month
http://www.minnpost.com/second-opinion/2013/03/controversy-o...
provide further updates about this particular local case.
A group blog post about medical research from 6 January 2012, "Why Do We Really Need Clinical Trials?"
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/index.php/why-do-we-real...
examines some of the trade-offs involved in the still flawed, but still necessary, process of conducting clinical trials of proposed new treatments. Human beings who propose new treatments often have a bias to suppose that the new treaments are more safe and more effective than previous treatments--especially if they have a financial interest in the new treatment. People who have a financial interest in other treatments, or in not seeking effective treatment at all (e.g., faith healers) may have a bias that runs in the other direction. The way to check the safety and effectiveness of a treatment is to run an honest clinical trial with adequate justification from known science and sufficient statistical power. But keeping the trial honest involves human beings disciplining themselves not to jump to conclusions. As Richard Feynman said to graduates of Caltech: "The first principle is that you must not fool yourself--and you are the easiest person to fool."