Concerns about Cochrane

dave30th said:
I've never understood the point of the cotton in prescription bottles. What's up with that?
Click to expand...

It says:
Bayer actually started the ritual in the early 20th century in order to keep their pills in place. Powder pills would often break from moving around in the bottle and people weren't getting their proper dosage because they would try to piece them together.

Medicine has come a long way in the past 100 years and most pills are coated, thus removing the need for the cotton.

According to the Wall Street Journal, Bayer stopped the practice in 1999, but because people are used to seeing the little cotton balls in their pills, they expect it -- some companies have kept the practice in place.
 
I've never bought into the whole stops the tablets moving around and breaking thing - firstly, because it doesn't, and secondly, if that's why they put it in why is it often found in bottles full of gelatine capsules, which won;t break.

I'm afraid the only reasonable explanation is because they think the tablets may be deemed illegal by someone, so put the wadding in to reduce the rattle, and hope that whomever is shaking the bottle then assumes there are no illegal tablets inside.
 
Wonko said:
I've never bought into the whole stops the tablets moving around and breaking thing - firstly, because it doesn't, and secondly, if that's why they put it in why is it often found in bottles full of gelatine capsules, which won;t break.

I'm afraid the only reasonable explanation is because they think the tablets may be deemed illegal by someone, so put the wadding in to reduce the rattle, and hope that whomever is shaking the bottle then assumes there are no illegal tablets inside.
Click to expand...
It's actually to make theft easier so that Bayer gets more orders from companies whose employees nick stuff.
Jonathan Edwards said:
It may be that my father had filched them from the pharmacy at work
Click to expand...
 
Dos anyone have any ideas of whether we should by trying to make use of this drama to push for changes at Cochrane/or greater awareness of the problems with the CFS reviews?

I'm naturally cautious about doing anything that could back-fire, and still don't really know where I stand on the controversy around Gøtzsche (I think that he's raising some justified concerns about Cochrane, but is far from the ideal figurehead), but this feel like something that will prompt people to more readily question Cochrane, and that's something we should be using to encourage greater discussion of our concerns.
 
Larun is at the Norwegian Knowledge Centre for the Health Services, which quite recently became part of the Norwegian Institute of Public Health (it wasn't when the Cochrane review was written).
Cochrane Norway is based at the Norwegian Centre for the Health Services - so there is a connection, but I don't know more details about this.

In November, the Norwegian ME Association will organise research days about ME together with the national competence service for CFS/ME (which there is currently a petition against among patients) and the Norwegian Institute of Public Health (which the Norwegian Knowledge Centre for the Health Services and thus Cochrane Norway is part of). There will be an event open for a general audience as part of these research days. The Norwegian ME Association shared yesterday the news that @dave30th will be coming.

(I will add the research day and the open event to the calendar once there is more info about programme, tickets etc.)
 
dave30th said:
Yes, I'm psyched. I've been to Bergen but not Oslo. It will be dark! But I lived in St. Petersburg for a year so got used to dark winter days.
Click to expand...
I was so happy when I learned you are coming to Oslo. Will try to be there.

It will be cold and dark, but I hope how highly appreciated you are among ME patients in Norway and how very welcome you will be will compensate a bit :)
 
Finally an article about this from Norway. This from the editor of the Journal for the Norwegian Medical Association. This journal quite often provide translations in English of articles, so no google translations this time!

Are Brean: Sannhet og konsensus
English: Truth and consensus

The scientific method’s primary hallmark is still the principle of constantly and critically challenging accepted truths – and rejecting them when they are no longer valid. This requires that truth is more important than consensus. Let us hope that this is not what has failed in the recent events at Cochrane.
 
Nothing new here, but I'm quit happy with this beein brought up by the editor himself, in the journal for medical professionals. Included an discussion about different thngs that can bias meta-reviews. He really opened up the door for us now - to start pointing out the problems with the cochrane reviews on pace/ME.

Beneath the outward drama lie deeper, more structural problems which revolve around more than who sits on Cochrane’s board. Criticism levelled by both Gøtzsche and others in recent years has concerned the degree to which we can trust the results from large-scale clinical studies (3). This kind of fundamental criticism is nothing new (4). Some people believe that we are undergoing a crisis in evidence-based medicine (5).
Click to expand...
 
'Cochrane: Collaboration or Cult?

https://davidhealy.org/cochrane-collaboration-or-cult/
The Cult have even put SMC (the Science Media Centre), who co-ordinated the launch of the Cult Review of the HPV vaccine, in an awkward spot. Which side do SMC take now, when the BMJ are coming out in favour of Goetzsche and Jefferson? This will be worth watching.'

In the context of the NICE review, this is worth tracking.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top