Connect with us

Hi, what are you looking for?

The Hilltop

Columns

Medical Science Should Serve People, Not Pharmaceuticals

Pharmaceutical companies fund most clinical research, shaping medical science to favor profit over patients. How does industry influence distorted outcomes and what can be done to ensure independent, transparent research?

Blue and white medication pill blister packs. (Photo courtesy of Christine Sandu via Unsplash)

Whether facing a global pandemic, navigating chronic illness or responding to environmental threats, society looks to medical science to heal, protect and advance our collective well-being.

But beneath the surface of peer-reviewed journals and cutting-edge discoveries lies a troubling reality: the pharmaceutical industry. The industry is worth over $1.6 trillion globally, according to Statista, and has an outsized influence on the direction, design and outcomes of scientific research.

By funding a significant portion of clinical studies, pharmaceutical companies can shape not only which questions get asked but also how results are interpreted and shared. 

This raises a pressing question where it must be established if the industry is driven by profit and who is science really serving? Is it the patients or shareholders?

Research for Sale

More than half of all clinical trials are now funded by pharmaceutical companies, according to JAMA network. At first glance, this might seem like a win-win situation. Private funding supports innovation, and the public reaps the medical benefits, however, when profit becomes the driving force, priorities shift.

Pharmaceutical companies are far more likely to fund studies for drugs that promise high financial returns, even when cheaper, more effective alternatives already exist. 

Research into rare diseases, non-patentable treatments or preventive care are areas that could profoundly benefit public health and remain underfunded. The reason is simple. There is no money to cure what affects only a few or to prevent disease when treatment is more profitable.

As Johns Hopkins researcher Stephan Ehrhardt stated, “My concern is that independent trials are on the decline and that means we have less high-quality data to inform public health that are not influenced by commercial interests.”

This growing reliance on pharmaceutical company funding has been consistently linked to research outcomes that favor the sponsor’s products.

This is not just a coincidence. Meta-analyses have confirmed the trend. One study found “that industry funding greatly increased the chances of pro-industry results, with an odds ratio of 3.60.”

In other words, studies funded by industry were 3.60 times more likely to report favorable results for industry-run studies. 

Another study confirms that “commercially funded clinical research is more likely to yield positive results than when funding comes from other sources.”

Distorted Outcomes

The influence of pharmaceutical companies extends beyond what gets studied. It also shapes how results are reported. Industry-funded studies are significantly more likely to produce favorable outcomes for the sponsor’s drug. 

Some well-known examples are Merck’s Vioxx, which was promoted despite known heart risks and later withdrawn. 

Another case is GlaxoSmithKline’s Study 329, which claimed the antidepressant paroxetine was safe and effective for adolescents. However, a later independent analysis revealed that the drug was neither effective nor safe, exposing serious flaws in the original reporting. 

This notion is supported by other research and data. 

Sergio Sismondo’s paper found that “positive data are over-reported relative to negative data.” In one study of antidepressant trials, “the 21 positive trials produced 19 stand-alone articles, whereas the 21 negative trials produced only 6.” 

This leaves doctors and patients with an incomplete picture of a drug’s true effects.

A Better Way Forward

The pharmaceutical industry should not be the enemy of science. It plays an essential role in advancing medicine. But the current model where profit dictates research priorities, influences outcomes and weakens accountability must change.

Publicly funded, independent research must be strengthened. Greater transparency and stricter conflict of interest regulations are necessary to restore trust. Patients deserve to know that the medications they take are backed by unbiased, rigorous science and not marketing strategies.

Medical science should serve people and not shareholders.

Advertisement. Scroll to continue reading.

When the pursuit of knowledge is subjugated to the pursuit of profit, the integrity of science and most importantly, the health and well-being of society suffers as well.

Copy edited by Anijah Franklin

Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Advertisement

You May Also Like

Variety

Rapper MIKE performed at local venue The Black Cat, joined by openers Sideshow, Niontay, and Semiratruth. Howard students attended, reflecting on music, fashion, and...

CAMPUS

Howard University speaks out against pro-Palestinian demonstrators at Howard for violating  the university’s Peaceful Assembly Policy and bringing non-Howard affiliates onto campus.

SPORTS

Sophomore Paris Fieldings took home first place at the NEC Championships earlier this month, making history as the first Bison to claim the title. 

CAMPUS

Nearly a month after the race for Howard University Student Association president and vice president ended in a runoff, the polls have reopened under...

Variety

This year's Springfest fashion show explored a retro 1970s theme, titled SoulScape.

Columns

Despite Western views and medical practices, natural remedies are utilized worldwide and should be more widely adopted in the U.S. healthcare system.