I’m really sad about this but it’s the truth . There are so many people telling something on topics that they have’nt even research before .
I’ve bookmarked dr.robin’s website , thanks for such a great share.

All he did was tell the well documented truth.

Ever hear of shills? How about Snake Oil salesmen? Same same.

The use of shills to push their product at every conceivable point along the Big Pharma chain has completely undermined the intrigrity of the scientific process and calls into question the accuracy, honesty and trustworthiness of the information the medical physicians are told and thus what they rely upon to prescribe medications to patients.

Here’s the bottomline, the drugs of today are oversold and are in too many cases a clear and present danger to the patients who take them.

It is totally inappropriate to question Dr Rubin’s ethics for writing this particular blog entry on DiabetesMine.com since the information, as he mentioned, is widely and freely available to all Online, especially from the NY Times.

He only opened your eyes to the truth.

The same applies to the use of a ghost writer. When a physician or researcher allows his or her name to be attached to a paper, he’s taking responsibility for it’s content. The actual wordsmith who wrote the paper is irrelevant.

What to me is of far greater concern is the advertising to the general public of prescription drugs. Not only is the cost of all that advertising built into the cost of the drugs (and thus paid by our health insurance premiums) but the usage of those drugs increases at the expense of lower cost alternatives…which further increases health insurance premiums.

Captain N was on Super Nintendo so not really new. But you win.

With Nelson’s reply, I do agree that the conflicts between book promotion and drug promotion are similar but rarely do books come with side effects like low-blood sugar, potential heart issues, etc.

I have a friend who works at a big name drug company (who makes drugs for type 2 patients) and he’s a t1. He says that even without blogs, games or other media-esque venues, companies know what we want already. Hence the creation of designer ailments that seem to suddenly have “syndromes” or other non-disease type names. They see what people complain about, look in their catalogs to see if one of their drugs can help and then then market the drug for it. New revenue stream, no drug dev cost, they win, people complain less.

Sadly, people aren’t immune to hype (snake oil just got a new name). I remember thinking that Lantus was “the stuff” and every doc saying that it worked for 24 hours. Did it? Hardly… everyone got hyped, few diabetics got paid, many diabetics paid out loads. Oddly, no lawsuits.

We cannot do away with conflict of interest and have the drugs we want at the same time. If drug companies did not pay for research and pay for influential people to promote their products, then they would not discover the products we want or make us aware of the existence of their products. I think it is important to condemn false advertising and demand full disclosure. But, we should to be cautious of, but not outright condemn simple conflicts of interest.

How about Glucoboy, or the much ridiculed Captain Novolin as examples of video games which promote diabetes drugs?

Can you furnish any examples of video games that promote these drugs?