Holding researchers and doctors accountable (Baylor, Harvard and other)

Something I learned from my PFS experience is that apart from holding companies (Merck and others) accountable for their acts, we should also pay attention to what concrete individuals do.

So just in case one day we confirm that the Harvard study and the Baylor study were aimed at sabotaging or delaying the obtention of justice and truth, it’s important to remember that this is not only about “Harvard” or “Baylor”, but also about these people.

5 Likes

This is not productive at all… in fact, I’d advise deleting this post.

1 Like

Individual actors should always be held accountable. Responsibility is always personal. Behind every institution there are people who make the decisions. If we had enough resources we would definitely want to write about the role of each one of them.

The recent Reuters article mentioned multiple people by name who were involved in making decisions at Merck. Likewise, I have tried to expose Dr. Rassman on Reddit. Other examples are included at the bottom.

We should definitely write about Mohit Khera and present all available facts and let people make their conclusion about his role. Same about the lead researcher at Harvard. Same about the inventors of finasteride. Same about the executives at Merck. Same about the FDA. Same about the authors of biased studies and review articles on finasteride.

These people need to be exposed and shamed publicly (those who have acted unethically). Transparency is the only way in society that anti-social and self-serving behavior is controlled.

I have always wanted to have “a wall of shame” exposing people who have contributed to creating the PFS catastrophe. There are multiple threads with elements of that.

For example:

6 Likes

Whilst I think that anger disappointment and also transparency about evident corruption and malpractice is understandable I am also doubtful if it’s beneficial for future collaborations with scientists if this forum starts smearing their kind and colleagues because of - also perfectly legitimate - dissatisfaction with study outcomes. Frankly I have no idea how this entire medical research business precisely works and I agree that accountancy is something to strive for but I’m also afraid that some actions as proposed are detrimental to our effort to further work with scientists. Could someone shed some light on this? Maybe I’m totally wrong. I also tend to think though that public pressure is vital to our cause.

1 Like

There is no compelling evidence that Baylor acted as an agent of Merck. Especially when their latest publication showed physical damages to penile tissue in post-5ari subjects. Listing authors of that paper and setting them up for naming and shaming is not acceptable. Leaving the names and authors who are not proven guilty of doing anything only sets them up for attack. Closing this thread.