Annie Appleseed Project
  • Home
  • About Us
    • Meet our Team
    • Global Partners
    • Appleseed Ambassadors
  • Media
    • Blog Post
    • Updates – Magazine Articles, Radio Shows, Etc.
    • YouTube
    • Newsletters
  • Conference Videos
  • Meeting Summaries
    • Many Paths to Wellness
    • 2024 CAM Conference Journal
    • Cam Conference 2023 >
      • Recipes
    • Cam Conference 2020
    • Summaries From Meetings >
      • 2016 Conference
    • Agendas from Annie Appleseed Project Conferences >
      • 2020 Agenda
      • 2019 Agenda
      • 2018 Agenda
      • 2017 Agenda
      • 2016 Agenda
      • 2015 Agenda
      • 2014 Agenda
      • 2013 Agenda
      • 2012 Agenda
      • 2011 Agenda
      • 2010 Agenda
      • 2009 Agenda
      • 2008 Agenda
    • 2018 AAPR Conference
  • Cancer Resources
    • Info by Cancer Types >
      • Living Beyond Breast Cancer conference
      • Alternative Cancer Therapies >
        • laetrile-vit-b17-amygdalin-from-apricot-kernels-induces-apoptosis-and-causes-cell-cycle-arrest-in-cancer-cells-an-updated-review
      • Handouts
  • More
    • Dr. Wong
    • Contact Us
    • Testimonials
  • Donate

KEY ELEMENTS OF HEALTH REPORTING

Posted September 2010 Key elements of health reporting:
​
  • What’s the total cost?
  • How often do benefits occur?  Ann’s NOTE: many drugs go to Phase I testing (Safey) and often fail by Phase II (Efficacy as in do they actually work?)
  • How often do harms occur?
  • How strong is the evidence? (only 30 in the study!!!) Ann’s NOTE: small studies are the norm in the Natural world.  There are two reasons, one is funding and the other is the cost of trials/clinical studies.
  • Are there alternative options?
  • Is this really a new approach?
  • Is it available to me?
  • Who’s promoting this?
  • Do they have a conflict of interest?

(Sorry we lost the reference)

“NIH Eyes Sweeping Reform of Peer Review”

from Science, November 1999, vol 286

This article describes the results of a “blue-ribbon” panel convened to discuss reforms at NIH. National Academy of Sciences president, Bruce Alberts “wants to completely restructured the array of study sections operated by NIH’s Center for Scientific Review (CSR) which pass judgement on about three-quarters of NIH grant applications”..

According to this article CSR has already “fashioned new study sections that handle applications from clinical researchers who feel they don’t get a fair shake in panels dominated by laboratory researchers and to provide homes for research proposals that don’t seem to fit anywhere else”.

What prompted the move to change the CSR system was a belief that the peer-review method was too often marred by “error-prone, turf-conscious nitpicking by obsolete study sections that reject novel ideas out of fear, ignorance or self-interest.”

Ann’s NOTE: There is a long way to go to fix the existing system. I have heard the complaints raised by researchers who are outside of the usual establishments, or areas of study. They do feel short-changed. It has been shown that the system favors those in postitions of power or key areas rather than new researchers. A prime example of this is the work done by the Department of Defense with its breast cancer research funds. The DOD chose to fund new idea people. This was a radical step. It is acknowledged by “insiders” that the best way to get funding is to have had funding. A bit of an “old boy network” thing.

Changes could be beneficial. I hope that “consumers”, that is what they call concerned citizen activists, can be involved in these discussions. We often add the forgotten human face.
WHO WE ARE   I   PRIVACY POLICY   I   ADVERTISING POLICY   I   ARCHIVES   I   IN HONOR/MEMORY OF

​Remember: We are NOT Doctors and have NO medical training. DISCLAIMER: The information provided is for educational purposes only. It is not meant to diagnose or treat any health condition and is not a replacement for treatment by a healthcare provider. This article or site may contain copyrighted material, the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of health, political, human rights, economic, democratic, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a “fair use” of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed an interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: Cornell University Law School.
​© Annie Appleseed Project. All rights reserved.
  • Home
  • About Us
    • Meet our Team
    • Global Partners
    • Appleseed Ambassadors
  • Media
    • Blog Post
    • Updates – Magazine Articles, Radio Shows, Etc.
    • YouTube
    • Newsletters
  • Conference Videos
  • Meeting Summaries
    • Many Paths to Wellness
    • 2024 CAM Conference Journal
    • Cam Conference 2023 >
      • Recipes
    • Cam Conference 2020
    • Summaries From Meetings >
      • 2016 Conference
    • Agendas from Annie Appleseed Project Conferences >
      • 2020 Agenda
      • 2019 Agenda
      • 2018 Agenda
      • 2017 Agenda
      • 2016 Agenda
      • 2015 Agenda
      • 2014 Agenda
      • 2013 Agenda
      • 2012 Agenda
      • 2011 Agenda
      • 2010 Agenda
      • 2009 Agenda
      • 2008 Agenda
    • 2018 AAPR Conference
  • Cancer Resources
    • Info by Cancer Types >
      • Living Beyond Breast Cancer conference
      • Alternative Cancer Therapies >
        • laetrile-vit-b17-amygdalin-from-apricot-kernels-induces-apoptosis-and-causes-cell-cycle-arrest-in-cancer-cells-an-updated-review
      • Handouts
  • More
    • Dr. Wong
    • Contact Us
    • Testimonials
  • Donate