I always sit in bewilderment at the exemption rules and clauses that exist inside the cogs of the pharmaceutical industry and its shills. For those that don't know, a 'shill' is a person who helps a person or organisation without disclosing that he or she has a close relationship with that person or organisation 
So, what if one finds something that is so way off mark that it could be detrimental to the health and safety of patients worldwide?
Well, I guess the first plan of action would be to contact the person/persons who created that 'something' and to show them that what they actually created had serious safety issues regarding the safety of children and adolescents.
Scientific misconduct appears to be a noose around Brown University School of Medicine's neck, much akin to the same noose that has taken the lives of children and adolescents prescribed Paxil [known as Seroxat in the UK]
For some time now Jon Jureidini, associate professor of psychiatry at the University of Adelaide, and Leemon McHenry, a lecturer in philosophy at California State University, have been calling for a retraction of, the now infamous, Paxil 329 study, a study that has, since its publication in 2001, been discredited for its use of selective reporting and ghostwriting shenanigans.
Brown University, whom, at the time, employed lead author of the Paxil 329 study, Martin Keller, were approached by McHenry and Jureidini who sought a retraction of the skewed study which, despite showing huge flaws, still appears in the Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry [JAACAP] today and, more than likely, is still used as a guide by many prescribing physicians who will read that "Paxil is safe and effective in the use of children and adolescents."
The fact that Paxil isn't safe and effective in children does not seem to bother Brown University, whom have replied to McHenry and Jureidini with what can only be described as a "D'uh so what" type of response.
The Dean of Medicine and Biological Sciences, Edward J. Wing, writes to McHenry and Jureidini with the following excuse:
"The University will not submit a letter requesting retraction to the editor of the JAACAP for the journal article written by Dr. Keller."
The reasons being a six year statute of limitations, which basically means McHenry and Jureidini were too late in filing their complaint.
Don't you just love the way corporate entities surround themselves in that protective red-tape.
Here we have a study with Keller cited as the lead author when in fact the whole study was ghostwritten by Sally K Laden, a shill hired by GlaxoSmithKline to say nice things about Paxil and to promote it in such a way that healthcare professionals would prescribe it to children and adolescents. Keller, merely put his name to the study because...well, because that's what Glaxo paid him to do.
The wording of Edward J. Wing's response to McHenry and Jureidini is interesting in as much that it claims that Keller wrote the article.
It's unknown if Wing has been on the planet Zog for the past 10 years or so or whether he is just towing the line. [self bondage in red tape]
Brown University are really showing a lack of ethics here, it's almost as if they have been skinny-dipping in icy cold waters and their balls have shrivelled to the size of peas, a great role model for students just starting out at Brown, doncha think?
They must hold Keller in high esteem to protect him so much, they must hang on to his every word regarding Paxil seeing as they claim he wrote the study.
Brown, as the name suggests, stinks like a river of floating turds, each one wrapped in red tape, each one stamped with a six year statute of limitations, each one so gut wrenchingly gaseous that nobody dare go near them for fear of seeing that sickly smile from Keller.
Swim beneath the Brown river and you'll find the voices of the dead Paxil children that Brown University wish to suppress, to ignore, to be swept into the pooper-scooper because their memories of their short lives mean absolutely nothing to Brown Uni officialdom.
Brown's reluctance to intervene is a two-finger salute to any child or adolescent being prescribed Paxil today. They should be utterly ashamed of themselves for using a statute when they knew well before the six year time limit that 329 seriously misrepresented the safety of Paxil in children and adolescents.
Unforgivable and cowardly are just two words that spring to mind...another is Karma.
ORDER THE PAPERBACK 'THE EVIDENCE, HOWEVER, IS CLEAR...THE SEROXAT SCANDAL' By Bob Fiddaman US and CANADA HERE OR UK HERE
AUSTRALIAN ORDERS HERE