 |
| Author | Post |
|---|
Foundation Staff
.
| Joined: | Sat Jul 10th, 2004 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 17283 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 3rd, 2005 16:43 |
|
My doctor wants to read about the MP in published medical journals. Where can I find them?
Dr. Marshall has published extensively online about the pathogenesis of Th1 inflammation, sarcoidosis and the Marshall Protocol. Not one sarcoidosis expert has refuted any of his writings. While we think all the information on our study site is credible, many doctors are only interested in reading papers published in 'recognized' print medical journals.
Dr. Marshall has published articles about recovering from Th1 inflammation with the Marshall Protocol in five print journals:
1) Marshall TG, Marshall FE: Sarcoidosis succumbs to antibiotics - implications for autoimmune disease. Autoimmunity Reviews,2004; 3(4):295-3001.
You can print a copy of the PubMed abstract at this URL:
http://tinyurl.com/5rgmq
The free full-text preprint is available from
http://tinyurl.com/5gn5b
The official-looking published version of the full-text available from the publisher (for a fee) at URL: http://tinyurl.com/a939p
2) Marshall TG, Fenter B, Marshall FE: Antibacterial Therapy Induces Remission in Sarcoidosis. Herald MKDTS 2004g; Volume III: Release 1. The Journal of the Interregional Clinical-Diagnostic Center, Kazan, (published in Russian translation). ISSN: 1726-6149
Available at this link.
3) Marshall TG: Are statins analogs of vitamin D? Correspondence to Grimes, DS. The Lancet 2006; 368:1234 doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(06)69509-3
Copy available from URL the Lancet Journals article full text
4) Dr Marshall's paper on molecular modeling
Describes the effect of the ARBs (and the superiority of Benicar at the appropriate dose) on the nuclear receptors of the immune system:
Research  
Common angiotensin receptor blockers may directly modulate the immune system via VDR, PPAR and CCR2b
Trevor G Marshall, Robert E Lee, Frances E Marshall
Theoretical Biology and Medical Modelling 2006, 3:1 (10 January 2006)
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] [PubMed] [Related articles]
5) Marshall TG: Vitamin D Discovery outpaces FDA decision making.
BioEssays Volume 30, Issue 2, Pages 173-182, February 2008
Online ISSN: 1521-1878 Print ISSN: 0265-9247
Copyright 2008 Wiley Periodicals, Inc., A Wiley Company
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/abstract/117885976/ABSTRACT
In accordance with the copyright assignment agreement I have put a free copy of the preprint of the Full Text on my personal website at
http://TrevorMarshall.com/BioEssays-Feb08-Marshall-Preprint.pdf
....................................................................................
A list of Dr. Marshall's other papers and presentations on Th1 inflammation and molecular modeling can be found in Papers and Presentations for Physicians
Our new "science' DVD contains two detailed presentations on the pathogenesis, one presented to the physicians of the AAEM, and one presented to theBiologists at Melbourne University. We also have DVDs available of our 2005 and 2006 Conferences. Most of the background material explaining the pathogenesis, and the curative therapy for these Th1 diseases, is covered during the 20 hours of presentations, panels and tutorials in that collection. Details are at URL
http://autoimmunityresearch.org/chicago2005.htm
***Dr. Marshall also has a long publishing history in other areas of the medical field and engineering. You may find those papers and other key articles and presentations listed at this link: http://tinyurl.com/c9tvj
Peer review
Dr Marshall wrote: "Our work has been peer-reviewed extensively, and been gone-over with a fine-tooth-comb.
Our JOIMR papers, for example, use open peer review, where the reviewers shed their anonymity to ensure the integrity of their reviews - take a look at the peer-reviews at the bottom of this paper: http://www.joimr.org/phorum/read.php?f=2&i=38&t=38
Additionally, all our conference abstracts and journal publications have been peer-reviewed. Here is a list of some of the work I have published over the course of nearly 25 years: http://www.trevormarshall.com/papers.htm
I have recently been cleared by a CME (Continuing Medical Education) committee as being competent to participate in providing CME training for physicians."
See also:
The Trouble With Medical Journals
What can medical research learn from the open source software movement?
Last edited on Wed Feb 20th, 2008 18:42 by Foundation Staff
|
Foundation Staff
.
| Joined: | Sat Jul 10th, 2004 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 17283 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sun Dec 9th, 2007 07:58 |
|
[filelink]
The Trouble With Medical Journals
Special Reports
Health Tue, Sep 19, 06
Add a pinch of salt to medical findings
Good debate: Don't believe all you read in a medical journal, a former editor tells Claire O'Connell
Every day, doctors thumb through medical journals looking for the latest information on treatments. Meanwhile, journalists relate the findings of published studies to millions of people.
And the underlying belief is that if it is in a prestigious medical journal, then it must be true. Right?
Not always, according to Dr Richard Smith, whose book, The Trouble with Medical Journals, is published today.
Smith, a medical doctor and editor with the BMJ (British Medical Journal) for more than 20 years, lifts the lid on shady ethical practices in large medical journals.
These include dodgy courtships with the mass media leading to public scares, as well as unsavoury links with the pharmaceutical industry, which he claims uses medical journals to promote its drugs.
He also recommends ditching the time-honoured practice of expert peers reviewing papers before they are published.
But why should we care about how medical journals work?
"The ways that medical journals behave have an important influence on people," Smith says.
"They can create a lot of havoc," he adds, citing examples where studies in medical journals sparked media-fuelled scares about emotive issues such as vaccination, alternative treatments for cancer and the contraceptive pill.
His book raises the awkward question of whether journals, in their passion for publicity, might be tempted to publish weak but controversial studies to grab media headlines on "things that are likely to appeal to the public's interest [ quite a different thing from the public interest]."
For example, a dubious study published in The Lancet in 1998 sparked media hype that led to public fears about links between the MMR vaccine and autism.
The study was later withdrawn, its author was discredited and numerous larger and more rigorous studies have since shown no link between the MMR jab and autism.
But the mud stuck, and uptake of the triple vaccine was substantially reduced.
"All medical journals publish rubbish, and quite a lot of it," says Smith, who openly admits transgressions by his own journal. "But luckily, most of it doesn't have the kind of impact that the MMR paper did."
However, medical journals have more worrying bedfellows than the media, according to Smith, who left the BMJ in 2004.
Top of his list of gripes is how "medical journals have become an extension of the marketing arm of the pharmaceutical industry".
Pharmaceutical companies sponsor most of the large clinical drug trials that are published in major medical journals, and the outcomes of such studies are generally good for the sponsor, he says.
"When you look at how often those trials come up with anything that's really bad news for the drug companies, the answer is almost never," says Smith.
"It's not because the drug companies are fiddling the results, it's just that they are rather clever at the kinds of questions that they ask and the way they analyse the data. So they very rarely come up with anything that's bad news," he says.
A favourable clinical trial published in a prestigious journal can have a major impact on drug sales, says Smith.
And there is also a pay-off for the journal: if the pharmaceutical company orders reprints of the paper to send to prospective clients, the journal can make hundreds of thousands of dollars in profit, he adds.
Such cosy arrangements benefit neither the doctor nor the patient, and Smith believes a more open and accountable approach would be to publish full details of trials on regulated websites and have journals critique them.
Smith also dismisses peer review, a vetting system where journal editors choose experts in a particular field (peers) to review submitted papers and recommend whether or not to publish them.
Getting a study into a peer-reviewed journal is generally seen as a mark of quality, but Smith disagrees.
"I think it would be good for the world at large to realise just what a dodgy process peer review is," he says.
"It just doesn't work very well and it's a bit of a lottery."
Instead, he believes that new studies should be published online where everyone can access them and spark a public discourse.
"I'm all for sticking it up on the web with a big sign saying don't believe this just because it's here, wait and see what response there is."
In fact, Smith believes that printed medical journals are generally not the place for original research data, because they offer little of value for doctors.
He suggests that journals instead convey the important information in print and put the full research reports on the web for those who are interested.
"The whole model of sending a lot of original research to ordinary doctors is bonkers," says Smith.
"Most of the scientific articles [in medical journals] are not relevant to the average doctor.
"He or she hasn't got time to read them anyway. And most doctors are not equipped to critically appraise the evidence, so there's a tendency to say 'it's in the New England Journal of Medicine so it must be true'."
The extensive list of ills in Smith's book, which he wrote during a two-month stay in Venice, came as something of a surprise, even to himself.
"I had no idea the book was going to turn out like that - I've become a grumpy old man," he says.
"But probably the closer you get to any institution, the more you see the human defects," he adds.
Dr Richard Smith will give a public interview hosted by Dick Ahlstrom, science editor of The Irish Times, on Thursday, September 21st at 6pm in the Royal Irish Academy, 19 Dawson Street, Dublin 2.
The event is co-organised by the British Council. Places are free but must be reserved in advance by phoning Laura on 01 6090635 or Maura on 01 6090633 (10am-5pm).
© The Irish Times
© 2006 ireland.com About Us | Privacy Policy | Help | ContactLast edited on Sun Dec 9th, 2007 07:59 by Foundation Staff
|
Current time is 12:56 | |
|
|
|
|
