Peter Gøtzsche argues that we should consider allowing whistleblowers to publish anonymously for their safety.

In a new article published in the Indian Journal of Medical Ethics, Peter Gøtzsche confronts the precarious position of whistleblowers who speak out against the pharmaceutical industry.

Academic journals typically do not publish articles anonymously, and anonymous sources are met with suspicion. While Gøtzsche acknowledges that named authorship is important in some contexts, he also argues that speaking up about corruption of academia and medicine by industry money has disastrous professional consequences and prevents many potential whistleblowers from coming forward. Therefore, to protect against industry corruption and prevent lives from being lost to prescription drug deaths, he argues that we must allow anonymity in authorship and in sources that speak up from within the industry.

“Healthcare is heavily influenced by vested interests, which are often financial, but academic prestige and protection of guild interests also play a major role. If anonymous authorship is not allowed, many potential whistleblowers would prefer to keep quiet, even though their stepping forward would serve the public interest and might save many lives, particularly by reducing prescription drug deaths. This is especially important since drugs are the third leading cause of death in the Western world. “

Numerous authors have written about the overwhelming corruption within academia...

Read Full Story: https://www.madinamerica.com/2022/06/pharmaceutical-industry-fda-use-mob-tact...