Posted by ttee on July 15, 2006, at 16:14:56
In reply to Re: couldn't have said it better myself, posted by SLS on July 14, 2006, at 22:55:22
The link with the STAR*D study information was interesting. Particularly, that all the "thought leaders" and psychiatrists involved are the same psychiatrists that get grants from the drug companies to give talks (sell) their drugs. These names are all in the top ten in receiving drug company money in psychiatry today. I understand that the drug companies didn't pay for STAR*D directly, but indirectly, they pay each of these scientists handsomely. As such, it is not surprising that the STAR*D data is very vague and does not discredit any patent meds, nor does credit any patent or non-patent ones either. One can say that no drug company was harmed during the course of the study; therefore, no drug company money to any of the scientists is in jeopardy. They way the system works; it is not possible to do any type of study these days without the drug companies having some level of influence. The best that could be done is to hire scientists for a NIH funded study that never had, or promise to never receive any sort of funding, grant, etc. from any drug company. None of the scientist thought leaders in the STAR*D study could qualify for that.
I hope I am wrong and may be at some point they will report something that could be used clinicaly from the STAR*D study. As it stands now, there is nothing except what we already knew and that for TRD, you just have to try everything and anything and hope for the best.
> > Off course Mirtazapine and Nortriptyline did not fare well in the Star*D study, as they are both off patent and the scientist don't have to worry about a drug company cutting off their funding.
>
> You might want to read this:
>
> http://www.nimh.nih.gov/healthinformation/stard_qa_general.cfm
>
>
> - Scott
poster:ttee
thread:662854
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20060709/msgs/667327.html