Strawman argument.
Drugs can benefit patients, no doubt.
And in some cases within state Family Services, parents Are compelled to ensure their children take their meds as a condition of maintaining custodym
My point that pharma doesn’t play by ethical rules is proven by the following facts:
Pharma and FDA oversight has been so untrustworthy that it took an act of Congress to address the following problems with incestuous self-intrested pharma-FDA relationship:
The ClinicalTrials.gov Results Database — Update and Key Issues
“KEY TRIAL-REPORTING POLICIES
Section 801 of the Food and Drug Administration Amendments Act (FDAAA)1
expanded the legal requirements for trial reporting at ClinicalTrials.gov.
*It was passed into law amid
concerns about *ethical and scientific issues affecting the design, conduct, and reporting of
clinical trials,2 *including the suppression and selective reporting of results based on the
interests of sponsors,3 unacknowledged alterations of prespecified outcome measures,4 “offshoring” of human-subjects research,5 and *failure to report relevant adverse events.6”
Per NIH study publication:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3066456/
No say you’re sorry to the 27,000+ people who were murdered by big pharma’s Vioxx scam, among numerous other drug scandals.
RE: “All drugs have adverse side effects and no one I know is forced to take them. I know a bit about drug development and it bears no resemblance to what you state. Drugs have actually saved millions of lives and prolonged millions more.”
I am familiar with the VIOXX disaster and others as well, but the vast majority have helped mankind. Have you ever conducted a clinical trial? I will answer for you: no you have not.
If you are concerned with psychotropic drugs, consider the fact that most people simply take ethanol to overcome their depression and anxieties. Where do you stand on that?