alt Hacker NewsThese studies have conflict of interest, funding, etc. disclosures.
If it was Lilly and Novo pushing these, they'd either show up in those disclosures or you're suggesting a massive conspiracy to undermine the medical regulatory system to sell more drugs that they already have struggled to meet demand for for extended periods of time.
Why would they kill a golden goose that shows no signs of stopping it's egg laying?
It's not so much a massive conspiracy as it is the known reality of how these companies operate. There is very little risk as oversight and real accountability are basically non-existent
Novo Nordisk has even demonstrated their willingness to ignore disclosure requirements (https://www.pslhub.org/blogs/entry/7950-wegovy-maker-novo-no...) multiple times even (https://news.sky.com/story/ozempic-maker-novo-nordisk-failed...) but the problem is everywhere including research
Here are just some examples:
> Cross-sectional studies across a heterogeneous set of conditions suggest that between 29 and 69 % of published clinical trial reports include disclosures of conflicts of interest. Studies measuring undisclosed conflicts of interest suggest that between 43 and 69 % of study reports and other articles fail to include disclosures of conflicts of interest (https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4854425/)
> chief medical officer at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York, failed to disclose relevant industry ties in dozens of research articles since 2013. (https://ashpublications.org/ashclinicalnews/news/4092/Leadin...)
> one in four Australian authors in 120 trials had at least one undeclared conflict, with an average value of undisclosed payment at almost AU $9000. (https://www.sydney.edu.au/news-opinion/news/2022/03/14/many-...)