1eye wrote:"Because, at the MS center I go to and where I am in a study, this is not true."
How would you know what the doctors are doing with drug reps after hours? If you think you are fooling anyone by saying you are in a study, I don't think you have many takers. If pharma loses big time on CCSVI, I'd be inclined to blame certain people, who cannot resist.
I had decided my previous post was going to be my last in this forum, but you questioned my credibility, so I will respond. And this will be it.
You can go back through my old posts, but I will save you some time. Here's one of my first (it was actually interesting reading):
I was interested in some of the issues that magoo raised, how doctors and hospitals get compensated for clinical trials, etc., so at one of my last visits (about four months ago), I quizzed the nurse about these things. She has been involved with clinical trials for MS for the past 10 years. She told me that the hospital negotiates the fees for the clinical trials up-front - how much they will be reimbursed for nurses' time, doctors exams, MRIs, blood tests, etc. Then a contract is signed. The doctors do not get anything extra for recruiting patients - in fact, it seemed to me they were annoyingly nonchalant about it. And if they were getting paid extra, they must have money to burn, since one drug company pulled them as a site due to lack of recruitment.
Now, granted, this is a hospital, and it's only one. Private practices may operate differently. That's why I was curious if there were any specific examples of doctors making a lot of money by recruiting MS patients for studies.
Yes, some pharmaceutical may stand to lose big revenues if CCSVI is found to be the cause of MS and angioplasty/stenting stops it (though many, including Dr. Zamboni are recommending people stay on their interferons or copaxone). And I'm all for that - how can anyone who has MS not be. But I have yet to see anything that says they are trying quash CCSVI study.