|
| |
Editorial
opinion Aug 2009
School of
Pharmacy targeting retail natural health stores ?
Auckland University is funding a research project by the School of Pharmacy
targeting retail natural health stores.
The questionnaire is supposed to be voluntary but they send out 3 packs over a
period of time. If the first one is not answered then another is sent, and then
another, and then they phone the store to ask why they are not complying. This
is stated in the covering letter as part of each sealed envelope to go to
employees. How can a repeated push for this information, be considered
“voluntary“ ?
|
And the questionnaires are also coded so as to know which
stores are not returning their questionnaire so each reply is able to be
isolated. Employers and all employees are asked to participate and return
their questionnaires separately..
And who is behind the funding of this research? Ben Goldacre, [ Bad Science London : Fourth Estate, 2008,]
quotes research that shows that -- presumably unintended -- bias in research
results favours the outcomes which the funding bodies -- and the
investigators -- would prefer.
But in this research the questions appear biased by -- for instance -- asking how
store staff feel about the failed bid last year to tighten up (or eliminate)
the NZ natural health industry by becoming a part of the TGA -- Therapeutic
Goods Administration -- in Australia.
The TGA were responsible for closing down Pan Pharmaceuticals by claiming
their products were not safe etc. Pan Pharmaceuticals went to court and won
their case against the TGA -- but this was not widely publicised but the
wrongful claim had
major negative effects on that business. |
|
|
|
Is any "Research" unbiased?
What is going on in the areas of Research carried out by - what should be
- impartial Taxpayer funded institutions?
In the last few days we hear that a study comparing organic food
with chemically grown plants is "not a healthier option".
They're joking ? No they just (deliberately?) haven't considered
factors that would skew this result away from a desired outcome by the
funding sponsor - guess who.
on a lighter note...
Are Health specialists biased
by their profession?
VillagePRESS |
VillagePRESS spoke to a number of
people in the NZ health food industry; it is clearly a widespread suspicion that
this University 'research' is a witch hunt in disguise; so that the
pharmaceutical industry can tighten up Kiwis’ freedom of choice regarding health
products.
The questionnaire is being carried out through the School of Pharmacy but refers
to pharmaceutical -- ie synthetic (created by Pharmaceutical companies and
available only in registered pharmacies) -- as CONVENTIONAL medicines.
The questionnaire refers to Health Store products as “Complementary“ medicines and the
products themselves as “manufactured -- Manufactured means industrially
produced”. What method is used for the manufacture of prescription drugs --
this description appears to suggest that pharmaceutical drugs are
‘professionally‘ created whereas Health products are ‘back shed’ concoctions.
In what is designed (?) to appear to be genuine investigation, the questionnaire
has a section that asks if customers have reported problems with using
“conventional“ (pharmaceutical) drugs -- and a similar section asking if there
are reports of problems with “complementary’ natural health medicines.
But the results for both go only to the “School of Pharmacy“; in order to be
seen to be avoiding bias, surely these returns should be shared in total with the equally
academic “Wellpark College of Natural Therapies”, for example. Were the results equally
available, then answers to problems with Pharmaceutical drugs would get careful
consideration and also be reported to the public.
We, the guinea pig public, could then make up our own minds about what we
took into our one-only-per-lifetime bodies.
And if the voluntary participants don‘t return the questionnaire, will they be
harassed? -- the covering letter warns they will get another, and then another,
and then a phone call to ask why -- but if the reply is “because the questions
seem to us to be biased” will that response be published?
-- PER Managing-Editor
NB:
These matters may be on the thoughts of others . Do
share your thoughts with us – with or without your name being published (but your
identity must known to Editor).
Puhoi's Tourist site*
www.puhoi.com Have you
taken photos in Puhoi? - Please let us know
Waiwera's Tourist site*
www.waiwera-nz.com Have you
taken photos in Waiwera? - Please let us know
|
