Originally Posted by alice md

The incentive to find new treatments for rare diseases (for which there is going to be a relatively small market, even if the medication is approved) is very limited.

I do believe that because of the extremely high expanses of the regulatory process there is a large incentive to "push" approval of medications.

Also, drug companies have an incentive to find new indications for their medications, as it makes the patent longer.

I am very suspicious of pharmaceutical company funded studies in which there is a significant gap between what is written in the results section and the discussion.

Many physicians will read the abstract and at the most the discussion. Most will not bother to look at the small details of the results. No one can blame the authors of the paper for trying to find reasons for why their original hypothesis was correct (even if the results do not seem to support it). You can only blame those who don't read the full paper thoroughly as they should.

The problem is not with modern medicine, but with the way it is practiced by some physicians.

There are other physicians who trust what is written in pamphlets given to them by drug reps. know better than their patients what is good for them (even if it is based on flawed clinical trials), treat their patients according to convenient guidelines and protocols (without thinking if those do or do not fit their individual patient).

I can easily understand how someone with no medical knowledge, experience or understanding can reach wrong and sad conclusions regarding modern medicine in general and the entire health care system after encountering such physicians.

I can easily understand how he/she would be ready to believe any quack who treats him with human understanding and compassion.

I can also understand how he/she will develop a very black and white picture of the medical profession.