[Cz-health-sci] Merck proposal is NOT A GOOD IDEA

Harvey Frey hsfrey at harp.org
Thu Nov 1 10:15:18 CDT 2007


>It is interesting that if you search rofexocib in the Merck manual you get 
>0 hits<

    That may be because it is spelled 'rofecoxib'.

Harvey

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Badgett, Robert G" <Badgett at uthscsa.edu>
To: "Larry Sanger" <sanger at citizendium.org>
Cc: "Biology Workgroup List" <cz-biology at voltaire.citizendium.org>; 
<cz-health-sci at voltaire.citizendium.org>
Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2007 11:04 PM
Subject: Re: [Cz-health-sci] Merck proposal is NOT A GOOD IDEA


Thanks for the opportunity to discuss this. I would not touch this offer 
either.

Aside from the Viox incident in which Merck is alleged to have withheld 
negative data from the NEJM (See Failing the Public Health - Rofecoxib, 
Merck, and the FDA - http://pmid.us/15470193 <http://pmid.us/15470193> ) 
(See Expression of Concern - http://pmid.us/16339408 
<http://pmid.us/16339408> ) and publishing a deceptive meta-analysis 
(http://pmid.us/14564311 <http://pmid.us/14564311> ), there are numerous 
studies of the hazards of conflicts of interest.

In the CZ evidence-based medicine article, I started a summary of empiric 
studies on the problems with conflict of interest in 
medicine(http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Evidence-based_medicine#Conflict_of_interest 
<http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Evidence-based_medicine#Conflict_of_interest> 
 ).

Perhaps a worse problem is that our relating with a conflicted entity may 
induce bad behavior on our part. See the start of a summary of this at 
http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Medical_ethics#Effect_on_the_conduct_of_research_and_publishing 
<http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Medical_ethics#Effect_on_the_conduct_of_research_and_publishing> 
. Most disturbing is the Stelfox NEJM study (http://pmid.us/9420342) listed 
at the preceding link.

Focusing now just on the quality of the Merck manual, there must be 
something good going on as it is in its 18th edition. However, in 1992, 
Antman showed the inaccuracies of traditionally edited textbooks that rely 
on the unaided expert (http://pmid.us/1535110 <http://pmid.us/1535110> ). 
Since then, medical texts have improved their methods to include things such 
as peer review, disclosing authors' conflicts of interest, attributing 
source evidence, frequent updating with literature searches supplied to 
authors from a central editorial office. The Merck Manuel does none of these 
and does not have an adequately transparent process.

So, there is theoretical risk that the Merck Manual is compromised and maybe 
biased. Let's look:

1. It is interesting that if you search rofexocib in the Merck manual you 
get 0 hits.

2. Another example: if you search Merck for "cox", you find this statement 
in the osteoarthritis chapter 
(http://www.merck.com/mmpe/sec04/ch034/ch034e.html), "NSAIDs, including 
cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitors or coxibs, may be considered if patients 
have refractory pain or signs of inflammation (eg, redness, warmth). NSAIDs 
may be used simultaneously with other analgesics (eg, tramadol, opioids) to 
provide better relief of symptoms." Does any MD on this list agree with this 
clinical recommendation by Merck? The Merck Manual omitted that the Cox-2 
drugs might increase myocardial infarctions. It seems the Stelfox bias has 
occurred.

So even if we think the Manuel operates with editorial independence from the 
Merck company, we have to deal with the quality of the Merck Manual.

In summary, I believe the Merck Manual's methods are outdated and there is 
evidence of inconsistent quality of content. Given time, we can write better 
content. When this happens, it might be hard to jettison the Merck links.

Bob


-----Original Message-----
From: cz-health-sci-bounces at mail.citizendium.org on behalf of Diana 
Zuckerman
Sent: Tue 10/30/2007 9:04 PM
To: Kevin M. Kelly; mgrey at mfi.ku.dk; 'Larry Sanger'
Cc: 'Biology Workgroup List'; cz-health-sci at voltaire.citizendium.org
Subject: [Cz-health-sci] Merck proposal is NOT A GOOD IDEA

My email on this subject seems to have gotten lost, and I can't seem to send 
it to some of the mailng lists, so I am sending it again and ask that those 
of you with acces to all these list servs also send it for me.

Since Merck is a pharmaceutical company that sells medical products, and 
since it already offers an online version of the Merck manual for free on 
the Internet, anything they submit should be VERY CAREFULLY reviewed 
individually on a case by case basis, with the understanding that it can be 
edited like any other article.

Although the Merck manual has an excellent reputation, the company's 
reputation (particularly regarding disclosure of risks of Vioxx) is not so 
stellar.  Please remember, the company's first loyalty MUST BE to their 
stockholders, not to the general public.

For the last few years I have participated in numerous conferences and 
discussions at the Institute of Medicine and other venues about how 
pharmaceutical companies control much of the content in medical journals, 
continuing medical education courses, and presentations at medical 
conferences and grand rounds.  It is a terrible idea to have them take over 
Citzendium too.

If we want the Citizendium to have any credibility at all, we need to avoid 
any collaborations like the one proposed by Merck.  That being said, it 
would be ok to check individual articles and decide on a case-by-case basis 
whether to use them.

Sincerely,
Diana Zuckerman, Ph.D.
President
National Research Center for Women & Families
1701 K Street, NW, Suite 700
Washington, DC 20006
(202) 223-4000


  ----- Original Message -----
  From: Kevin M. Kelly
  To: mgrey at mfi.ku.dk ; 'Larry Sanger'
  Cc: 'Biology Workgroup List' ; cz-health-sci at mail.citizendium.org
  Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2007 8:43 PM
  Subject: Re: [Cz-health-sci] [5] Merck proposal


  I agree!

  'We' need to associate the compendium with authorative sources. 
Association
  with Merck is a no brainer.

  Now a belated hello.  I am digging out from under my wave of obligations.


  Best regards,

  Kevin

  <--
  www.Toksave.com
  www.KellyWebworks.com
  www.MySignatureFile.com
  -->
  -----Original Message-----
  From: cz-health-sci-bounces at mail.citizendium.org
  [mailto:cz-health-sci-bounces at mail.citizendium.org 
<mailto:cz-health-sci-bounces at mail.citizendium.org> ] On Behalf Of Michael J
  Grey
  Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2007 6:41 PM
  To: Larry Sanger
  Cc: 'Biology Workgroup List'; cz-health-sci at mail.citizendium.org
  Subject: Re: [Cz-health-sci] [5] Merck proposal

  Dear All,

  I think this is an excellent idea. I have used the Merck Manual for many
  years. I frequently refer my students to this source.

  Best regards,
  Michael.

  MJ Grey, PhD
  Associate Professor

  Department of Neuroscience and Pharmacology & Department of Exercise and
  Sport Science University of Copenhagen, Denmark
  http://www.cph-ncm.ku.dk/mgrey/ <http://www.cph-ncm.ku.dk/mgrey/>



  Larry Sanger wrote:
  > All,
  >
  > The following is a proposal we received.  I have some comments after it.
  >
  > ========
  > First, let me applaud your effort to provide a wiki with content from
  > expert contributors. There is a great deal of information available
  > free online, though not all of it is reliable.
  >
  > Second, I propose a collaboration between Citizendium and the Merck
  > Manuals department at Merck & Co., Inc. This department, of which I'm
  > a staff member (Executive Editor, Electronic Publications), publishes
  > The Merck Manual, a print and online textbook created by expert
  contributors.
  >
  > We are prepared to place links in your External Links section of
  > Citizendium topics to related material in our online version of The
  > Merck Manual. Two
  > examples:
  >
  > Subject: Guillain Barre Syndrome.
  > Your page: http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Guillain-Barre_syndrome 
<http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Guillain-Barre_syndrome>
  > The link in External Links would go to:
  > http://www.merck.com/mmpe/sec16/ch223/ch223d.html 
<http://www.merck.com/mmpe/sec16/ch223/ch223d.html>
  >
  > Subject: Otitis Externa.
  > Your page: http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Otitis_externa 
<http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Otitis_externa>
  > The link in External Links would go to:
  > http://www.merck.com/mmpe/sec08/ch088/ch088c.html 
<http://www.merck.com/mmpe/sec08/ch088/ch088c.html>
  >
  > Unfortunately, we are not in a position to author material for you,
  > but we'd be delighted to add value to your pages with links to our
  > material. We invite you to visit The Manual at
  > http://www.merck.com/mmpe/index.html 
<http://www.merck.com/mmpe/index.html>  to determine for yourself whether
  > links to this content is acceptable and desirable. In a preliminary
  > review, I found 40 to 50 Citizendium topics to which we could 
contribute.
  >
  > Please let me know if you are interested in such a collaboration.
  > ========
  >
  > I can say (publicly on this list) that this would be welcome to me.
  > Merck has an excellent reputation, and it seems unlikely that there
  > would be anything in their manuals that we should not send users to.
  >
  > More important, perhaps, is that this very small request (it's
  > basically just a request to add 50 links to CZ) might be the beginning
  > of a useful collaboration.
  >
  > I'm inclined to say "yes," but I wanted to get your feedback first.
  >
  > --Larry
  >
  > _______________________________________________
  > Cz-health-sci mailing list
  > Cz-health-sci at mail.citizendium.org
  > http://mail.citizendium.org/mailman/listinfo/cz-health-sci 
<http://mail.citizendium.org/mailman/listinfo/cz-health-sci>
  >
  _______________________________________________
  Cz-health-sci mailing list
  Cz-health-sci at mail.citizendium.org
  http://mail.citizendium.org/mailman/listinfo/cz-health-sci 
<http://mail.citizendium.org/mailman/listinfo/cz-health-sci>



  _______________________________________________
  Cz-health-sci mailing list
  Cz-health-sci at mail.citizendium.org
  http://mail.citizendium.org/mailman/listinfo/cz-health-sci 
<http://mail.citizendium.org/mailman/listinfo/cz-health-sci>


  --
  Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
  Checked by AVG Free Edition.
  Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.13.33/1036 - Release Date: 
9/28/2007 3:40 PM








--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


> _______________________________________________
> Cz-health-sci mailing list
> Cz-health-sci at mail.citizendium.org
> http://mail.citizendium.org/mailman/listinfo/cz-health-sci
> 




More information about the Cz-health-sci mailing list