Abstract:
This dissertation followed the key question of "does the pharmaceutical sector
have systematic corruption within its practices and research methodology". A
total of 48 different sources were amassed from online journals, medical articles,
medical publications, and published videos relating to this question, with a variety
of well-respected authors and organisation being utilised in order to improve the
reliability of the research and therefore improving the strength of the conclusion made,
such as Transparency International UK (unbiased objective organisation for drug
publications) and positively reviewed book (by the bmj-cited as a reliable source for
medical research and knowledge) "Bad Science" by best-selling author Ben
Goldacre. Sources for and against the existence of systematic corruption were
compared on a number of criteria, including their relative credibility given the use of
substantiated statistics and author, their nature as a source (i.e. is it a well documented article
or a video) and how well the contents of the source is supported or refuted by the other
sources selected.
ter
Introduction - My project title, "Is there systematic corruption within the
practice of the pharmaceutical sector?":
I selected my title due to an interest taken in recent (last decade) significant
levels of controversial and fraudulent cases of manufacturing surrounding
pharmaceutical companies such as GlaxoSmithKline and Pfizer. Intriguingly, these
incidences were not the first offences, but one of a series of offences that these companies
seemingly commit. As such, I wanted to discover if there was some sort of systematic
method or practice behind such behaviour that could be consistently applied across
the large majority of the pharmaceutical sector, from large manufacturers down
to the medical experts who alter their guidance and product promotion based on
existing research credible or not. I was also interested to investigate other areas of
society surrounding the pharmaceutical sector, as I hoped that some of these influences may
help shed some light on why corruption may exist.
Of course, such a topic can be regarded as controversial. Undoubtedly, morally good
people work in every sector of the economy, so implicating people as corrupt or
dishonest in their practice may be offensive to them and their associates, as well as
incorrect. Secondly, like with any controversial topic, this question raises sensitive
issues for those involved in some of the incidents, as malpractice and manipulation
within medical practices can have serious and life-altering ramifications. Thirdly, my
question may have implications for society, with the impact it may have on mental or
physical wellbeing also needing to be assessed. Finally, a knock-on effect of such a question
This dissertation followed the key question of "does the pharmaceutical sector
have systematic corruption within its practices and research methodology". A
total of 48 different sources were amassed from online journals, medical articles,
medical publications, and published videos relating to this question, with a variety
of well-respected authors and organisation being utilised in order to improve the
reliability of the research and therefore improving the strength of the conclusion made,
such as Transparency International UK (unbiased objective organisation for drug
publications) and positively reviewed book (by the bmj-cited as a reliable source for
medical research and knowledge) "Bad Science" by best-selling author Ben
Goldacre. Sources for and against the existence of systematic corruption were
compared on a number of criteria, including their relative credibility given the use of
substantiated statistics and author, their nature as a source (i.e. is it a well documented article
or a video) and how well the contents of the source is supported or refuted by the other
sources selected.
ter
Introduction - My project title, "Is there systematic corruption within the
practice of the pharmaceutical sector?":
I selected my title due to an interest taken in recent (last decade) significant
levels of controversial and fraudulent cases of manufacturing surrounding
pharmaceutical companies such as GlaxoSmithKline and Pfizer. Intriguingly, these
incidences were not the first offences, but one of a series of offences that these companies
seemingly commit. As such, I wanted to discover if there was some sort of systematic
method or practice behind such behaviour that could be consistently applied across
the large majority of the pharmaceutical sector, from large manufacturers down
to the medical experts who alter their guidance and product promotion based on
existing research credible or not. I was also interested to investigate other areas of
society surrounding the pharmaceutical sector, as I hoped that some of these influences may
help shed some light on why corruption may exist.
Of course, such a topic can be regarded as controversial. Undoubtedly, morally good
people work in every sector of the economy, so implicating people as corrupt or
dishonest in their practice may be offensive to them and their associates, as well as
incorrect. Secondly, like with any controversial topic, this question raises sensitive
issues for those involved in some of the incidents, as malpractice and manipulation
within medical practices can have serious and life-altering ramifications. Thirdly, my
question may have implications for society, with the impact it may have on mental or
physical wellbeing also needing to be assessed. Finally, a knock-on effect of such a question
